Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine and get Washington Briefing: politics and policy stories that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!
WHAT MATTERS MOST ABOUT BARRETT: Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination was already bad news for climate activists and Democrats who want to expand the federal government’s efforts to tackle greenhouse gas emissions. Her personal views on climate science aren’t likely to change that.
That’s because her view of the law and agency authority is likely to trump her perspective on climate science in any case on EPA or other climate regulations that comes before the Supreme Court.
Most major climate cases deal with nuanced contours of the law (i.e. whether a statute allows the EPA to take a certain action or whether the courts should defer to an agency’s interpretation of the law) rather than the nitty gritty details of climate science.
And while Barrett hasn’t said much personally about climate change previously, nor has she decided any major climate cases while on the Seventh Circuit, her legal views suggest she’d be inclined to take a narrow reading of what the federal government can do to address climate change under current law.
“This is such a silly issue,” Jonathan Adler, a conservative lawyer who teaches environmental law at Case Western University, said in a tweet. “A judge’s view of the science, outside what is presented in a case, has no bearing on how they apply the relevant legal doctrines.”
Underscoring activists’ fears: Democrats and environmentalists, though, say Barrett’s responses on climate change over the past two days are disqualifying.
“I certainly do believe your views are relevant, and I’m very concerned about your statements,” said Sen. Kamala Harris during a round of questioning Wednesday.
“Since the Massachusetts vs. EPA case, scientific consensus has grown even more and stronger that climate change is real and it is caused by manmade greenhouse gas pollution and it poses significant threats to human life,” Harris added, citing the landmark 2007 Supreme Court case that held the EPA has the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. (The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg was part of the 5-4 majority in that case).
In response to questions from Harris, Barrett reiterated she wouldn’t take a view on climate science. “You have asked me a series of questions that are completely uncontroversial, like whether COVID-19 is infectious, like whether smoking causes cancer, and then trying to analogize that to eliciting an opinion from me that is on a very contentious matter of public debate,” she said. “I will not express a view on a matter of public policy, especially one that is politically controversial because that is inconsistent with the judicial rule as I have explained.”
Harris responded, “You’ve made your point clear that you believe it’s a debatable point.”
Barrett’s refusal to comment on climate science will draw extra scrutiny from environmentalists and Democrats on how and whether Barrett defers to scientific experts on climate change issues.
“Judge Barrett says she would follow the Administrative Procedure Act and defer to agency factfinding when it’s supported by substantial evidence,” said Michael Gerard, founder and director of Columbia University’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, in a tweet. “Hold her to this if the occasion arises. The evidence on climate change is overwhelming — as clear as that on COVID19 and smoking.”
Welcome to Daily on Energy, written by Washington Examiner Energy and Environment Writers Josh Siegel (@SiegelScribe) and Abby Smith (@AbbySmithDC). Email [email protected] or [email protected] for tips, suggestions, calendar items, and anything else. If a friend sent this to you and you’d like to sign up, click here. If signing up doesn’t work, shoot us an email, and we’ll add you to our list.
FERC’S BIPARTISAN STATEMENT ON CARBON PRICING: FERC issued a policy statement on a bipartisan basis today that declares the commission has the legal authority to review market rules from power operators that seek to incorporate state-level carbon prices.
Republican Chairman Neil Chatterjee said the proposed policy “puts down a marker” signaling FERC “encourages” regional grid operators, the Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators, to incorporate state carbon pricing into their markets.
Chatterjee clarified the policy does not mean FERC is setting a carbon price, which he says is outside the commission’s authority. The move follows a first-of-its kind carbon pricing conference FERC hosted last month.
“Today’s action is no small feat,” Chatterjee said. “The topics surrounding mitigating carbon emissions can often become highly politicized and divisive. However, we’ve taken on a really complex issue, looking at it just within our jurisdictional bounds, and we’ve found sensible areas of agreement.”
Glick not entirely satisfied: Democrat Richard Glick supported the proposed policy, although it’s not “groundbreaking.” Glick said the policy would give states interested in carbon pricing “confidence” which is a “positive step forward.”
Glick, however, continued to criticize Chatterjee and FERC’s other Republican, James Danly, for approving several natural gas projects without assessing how their emissions would contribute to climate change.
“It is just a matter of time before the courts rescind a certificate” for a pipeline because of an inadequate climate change review, Glick said.
He also faulted FERC’s Republicans for accepting, in part, a compliance filing from power market operator PJM implementing the commission’s controversial order targeting state-issued clean energy subsidies. Glick said FERC’s so-called MOPR order would “increase prices and stifle state efforts to promote clean energy.”
OIL DEMAND UP AGAIN: U.S. oil demand increased last week to 19.5 million barrels per day from 18.3 million b/pd the week prior, the EIA reported Thursday in its Weekly Petroleum Status report, the second straight week of higher consumption.
The week ending Oct. 9 saw gasoline demand fall, but jet fuel and diesel consumption rise.
EIA also reported a 3.8 million barrel decrease in commercial crude inventories after an increase last week.
OCCIDENTAL SEES PEAK PRODUCTION IN THE PAST: The U.S. won’t ever again produce a record 13 million barrels per day of oil as it did this year before the pandemic, Permian producer Occidental Petroleum predicted Wednesday.
“It’s just going to be too difficult to replace the 2 million barrels a day of production that we’ve lost, and then to further grow beyond that,” CEO Vicki Hollub said at the Energy Intelligence Forum. “Over the next three to four years there’s going to be moderate restoration of production, but not at high growth.”
Unlike some European rivals, Hollub still sees strong long-term demand for oil, saying, “I expect we’ll get to peak supply before we get to peak demand.”
Bad bet? Occidental Petroleum, like other oil companies during the price crash, has written down the value of its assets by billions of dollars, while posting major losses and slashing capital spending. It took a huge bet on shale after purchasing rival and major shale player Anadarko Petroleum last year.
But its more circumspect views now are not unique among U.S. companies. About two-thirds of 154 oil and gas companies surveyed by the Dallas Fed recently said they believe U.S. oil production has peaked.
OPEC LEADER FEARS ‘RELAPSE’: OPEC, while not exactly worried about peak oil demand, has immediate worries about the state of the market that could force the group and its allies to continue to hold back supply.
“I want to assure you that the OPEC, non-OPEC partnership will continue to do what it knows best, by ensuring that we don’t relapse into this almost historic plunge that we saw,” OPEC Secretary General Mohammad Barkindo said today at the Energy Intelligence Forum.
“We have to be realistic that this recovery is not picking up pace at the rate that we expected earlier in the year,” he added. “Demand itself is still looking anaemic.”
The slow comeback of demand, along with new supply from places like Libya, has raised questions of whether OPEC+ could look to renege on its plan to ease its supply restrictions in January as planned.
OPEC+ is scheduled to reduce its production cuts by 2 million barrels per day from 7.7 million b/pd currently.
BIDEN LOCKS DOWN SCIENCE VOTE: The science journal Nature is endorsing Joe Biden, breaking from its non-political tradition to back the Democratic nominee.
The journal criticized Trump for politicizing science, and taking “actions are accelerating climate change, razing wilderness, fouling air, and killing more wildlife — as well as people.”
As the world grapples with global health and climate challenges, “Joe Biden must be given an opportunity to restore trust in truth, in evidence, in science and in other institutions of democracy, heal a divided nation,” they write.
Other normally apolitical science journals, including the New England Journal of Medicine and Scientific American, have also endorsed Biden for similar reasons.
SPEAKING OF SCIENCE… EPA SHAKES UP ADVISORY BOARD: The EPA appointed six new members to its Science Advisory Board on Wednesday and switched up the board’s leadership, in a move environmentalists say further entrenches members with ties to industry into a panel that is supposed to offer the EPA independent scientific advice.
John Graham, who headed the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs during the George W. Bush administration, was picked to chair the advisory board. Graham, currently an environmental affairs professor at Indiana University, was appointed to the SAB in 2017. He has drawn criticism from environmentalists, who argue he has tilted regulatory analyses to favor industry.
New appointees to the SAB include Kenneth Mundt, a chemical industry consultant, and Joseph Haney, a toxicologist with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. The SAB’s prior chair, Michael Honeycutt, heads the toxicology department at the Texas agency.
Making a mark on the SAB: The new appointments — as well as 13 reappointments for current members — mean the Trump administration will have had a long-lasting effect on the SAB even if Biden wins in November. SAB members serve for three-year terms before they can be reappointed for another two-year term.
EPA TO FAST-TRACK APPROVAL FOR ‘LONG-LASTING’ DISINFECTANTS: The EPA announced Wednesday it has established an expedited pathway for approval of longer lasting disinfectants, which can kill viruses like the coronavirus for multiple hours, days, weeks, or even years after the product is applied.
Under the EPA’s proposed guidance, the agency will move consideration of these types of products “to the front of the line” and review them as quickly as possible, said Alexandra Dapolito Dunn, the EPA’s chemicals chief. That speedy review won’t “be achieved at the expense of any safety or efficacy,” she told reporters.
The EPA has already conditionally approved one long-lasting disinfectant. The EPA approved SurfaceWise2, which can continuously kill the coronavirus for seven days, on an emergency basis for use in certain Texas facilities, including in American Airlines facilities and planes.
MURKOWSKI PUSHES FOR NUCLEAR BILL IN FINAL NDAA: Sen. Lisa Murkowski, chairman of the Energy Committee, and Democratic Rep. Elaine Luria led a letter of 29 lawmakers to leaders of the Armed Services Committee urging them to include the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act in a final defense bill being negotiated between the two chambers.
The legislation would promote innovation in advanced nuclear reactors by providing funding for demonstration programs, enabling the Defense Department to deploy microreactors, and creating a program to supply reactors with High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium.
The Rundown
Bloomberg Energy demand to receive a work-from-home boost this winter
Washington Post The number of global methane hot spots has soared this year despite economic slowdown
Wall Street Journal Bribery probe into a nuclear plant bailout examines facilities’ owner
Washington Post Philanthropies flow funds to climate technologies
Calendar
THURSDAY | OCT. 15
2 p.m. The Conservation Coalition and the Conservative Energy Network hold a virtual event releasing new polling on clean energy and climate.
