OVERNIGHT ENERGY: EPA won’t regulate rocket fuel chemical tied to developmental damage: NYT | Emissions drop during pandemic creates unexpected challenge | House coronavirus stimulus bill to include effort to limit political influence over science

HAPPY THURSDAY! Welcome to Overnight Energy, The Hill’s roundup of the latest energy and environment news. Please send tips and comments to Rebecca Beitsch at rbeitsch@digital-release.thehill.com. Follow her on Twitter: @rebeccabeitsch. Reach Rachel Frazin at rfrazin@digital-release.thehill.com or follow her on Twitter: @RachelFrazin.

CLICK HERE to subscribe to our newsletter.

THE RULE THAT WASN’T: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will not set a limit on a chemical used in rocket fuel that has been linked with brain damage, The New York Times reported Thursday, though the agency said it has not yet made a final decision on the rule.

The EPA in May 2019 proposed limits for perchlorate in drinking water that critics said were 10 to 50 times higher than what experts recommend.

A court order required the EPA to set a new perchlorate standard by June, but according to the Times, the agency plans to send a rule to the Office of Management and Budget arguing any regulation of the substance is unnecessary.

“The agency has determined that perchlorate does not occur with a frequency and at levels of public health concern, and that regulation of perchlorate does not present a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction for persons served by public water systems,” the draft policy reads, according to the newspaper. 

An earlier proposal from the agency suggested placing the maximum contaminant level at 56 parts per billion (ppb), up from the 15 ppb proposed under the Obama administration.

Some states have their own regulations on perchlorate that fall as low as 2 ppb. The substance is naturally occurring but has also leached into water through military use. It’s commonly found in solid rocket propellants, fireworks, matches and signal flares.

“The science on perchlorate is very clear: It harms infants and the developing fetus,” Olga Naidenko, senior science adviser for children’s environmental health at the Environmental Working Group, said when the EPA unveiled its proposal last May. 

“Perchlorate can cause irreparable damage to both cognitive and physical development. Instead of taking action to lower the levels of this rocket fuel chemical in drinking water, the administration’s plan will endanger the health of future generations of kids.”

The EPA said it has not yet decided how to proceed with regulating perchlorate.

“The agency has not yet made a final decision and any information that is shared or reported now would be premature, inappropriate and would be prejudging the formal rulemaking process. The next step in the process is to send the final rule to the Office of Management and Budget for interagency review. The agency expects to complete this step shortly,” the agency told The Hill by email.

A release from the agency sent just minutes after the Times story was posted argued that partnerships between the agency and states has helped reduce perchlorate levels.

Read more on perchlorate here. 

QUITE THE EXPERIMENT: Stay-at-home orders around the world have set the stage for an unintentional experiment: What happens to the planet when some of the most polluting activities grind to a halt?

Carbon emissions have plummeted as people stick close to home, leading to drastic declines in the use of cars and planes. Even some industries that are less consumer-focused have seen emissions fall.

And while that may seem like welcome news, many environmentalists now worry that the public will draw the wrong conclusions from what is likely to be a temporary drop in pollution. They’re concerned people will fall into one of two camps: that significant progress has been made in battling climate change, or that stopping global warming requires a massive disruption to the economy and day-to-day living.

“This drop definitely lets us know human activities are a big factor in heat trapping emissions. But that said, the lesson is not that you tank the global economy,” said Brenda Ekwurzel, a climate scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists. “You can’t have lots and lots of lockdowns and think you’re solving the climate crisis.”

“You have to do things in a sustained way rather than in a crisis way, which is what we’re doing now with COVID-19. It’s so destructive and affects the economy,” she said.

The massive disruption to daily life amid the coronavirus is projected to lead to the largest drop in global emissions since World War II. The International Energy Agency (IEA) is predicting an “unprecedented” 8 percent drop in global carbon emissions for 2020.

The IEA found that during the first three months of 2020, global emissions were 5 percent lower than in the same period last year, largely due to decreases in emissions from coal, oil and natural gas. In the U.S., the drop was 9 percent.

But any decline is likely to be short-lived, highlighting the magnitude of the effort needed to address climate change over the long term.

“The changes we need must be year on year. An 8 percent decline in emissions would be a huge decrease,” said Rob Jackson, an environmental scientist at Stanford University and head of the Global Carbon Project.

“If next year is flat or goes back up, it’s not enough to get us to our climate needs,” he said.

To be sure, mainstream environmental groups aren’t supportive of cutting emissions the quarantine way, in large because it isn’t sustainable.

Instead, many experts have been calling for long-term investments in more environmentally friendly infrastructure that would boost public transit and ease the transition to electric vehicles while pushing emissions reductions in electricity and how goods are transported worldwide.

“It does need to be a similar magnitude of change,” Davis said of the resulting emissions drop under quarantine. “It just needs to be coordinated and not prevent people from going to work and living their lives.”

Read more on what coronavirus means for the climate here. 

BILL WATCH:

A matter of integrity…A package of amendments set to be included in House Democrats’ coronavirus stimulus bill includes a measure that would block the Trump White House and future administrations from distorting or shelving scientific studies for political reasons.

The measure was first introduced in 2017, when the early days of the Trump administration had some scientists saying their work on climate change was being stalled by political appointees.

And scientists say recent actions from the White House show the measures are still needed.

“I think everyone particularly in the time of a pandemic can see how important it is to hear from the scientific experts directly, without political filters,” said Andrew Rosenberg with the Union of Concerned Scientists, which has backed the concept.

The Scientific Integrity Act requires agencies to draft policies that prevent misrepresenting or suppressing scientific research their employees produce. Government scientists would also be able to petition their agency’s Scientific Integrity Officer if they felt their work was being improperly concealed from the public. The bill has been included in the manager’s amendment to the Heroes Act set to be considered Friday.

Read more on the legislation here. 

Staying plugged in… Sens. Tom Carper (D-Del.) and Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) have introduced a bill that would expand the tax credit for installation of fast-charging electric vehicle stations or hydrogen refueling stations.

“This is a commonsense way Congress can spur economic investments in our nation’s aging infrastructure, help reduce transportation pollution, and support the millions of Americans that are considering buying a clean car today or in the future,” Carper said in a release.

EMINENTLY QUOTABLE: “Frankly, we’re going to see, I think, some permanent structural changes in that industry,” former Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said in an interview with Steve Clemons, who writes The Hill’s Coronavirus Report. 

“And those structural changes were being called for before the virus because of the structure of the American oil industry, which was not exactly managing a great cash flow. … Not all of those jobs, frankly, are going to be there, so we need to think ahead.”

Read more on his forecast for the industry here. 

REPORTING IN: The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) has begun to compile weekly data on oil storage capacity, providing more real time information as prices fluctuate due to challenges of storing the oversupply of oil.

“We will continue publishing these until the market moves past the current oversupply conditions,” EIA Administrator Linda Capuano wrote in a letter to Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) who had asked the agency for more frequent updates on storage conditions. 

OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY:

Bundy’s trenches may force confrontation with BLM, E&E News reports

Coronavirus is stalling air quality, pollution rules, even in eco-minded California, the Los Angeles Times reports

Grand Canyon begins reopening with limited access, we report

ICYMI: From Thursday…

Grand Canyon begins reopening with limited access

FROM THE HILL’S OPINION PAGES:

Bloomberg wages war on COVID-19, but will he abandon his war on coal? asks Thomas J. Pyle, president of the American Energy Alliance.