The European Union (EU), which has a plan to eliminate all Russian oil by the end the year, is being attacked by congressional Republicans. They are demanding a disclosure requirement on climate risk and the Pentagon will cease burning forever chemicals.
This is Overnight Energy & EnvironmentThe latest news on energy, the environment, and beyond is available at. Someone forwards you this newsletter from The Hill, wereRachel FrazinandZack Budryk.Subscribe here
EU proposes to ban Russian oil imports
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen formally proposed a ban on all imports of Russian oil by the end of 2022 over Moscows invasion of Ukraine in a Wednesday speech to the European Parliament.
When [European]Leaders met in Versailles and agreed to reduce our dependence on Russian fossil fuels. Von der Leyen cited earlier steps to eliminate Russian coal imports.
It will not be easy because some member-states depend heavily on Russian oil. We have to do it. Therefore, we propose to ban all Russian oil coming into Europe.
What’s covered? The European leader stated that the ban would be applied to all imports, pipeline and sea-borne, crude and refined.
- Von der Leyen stated that the phaseout would be done in a controlled manner that minimizes disruption to the market and allows time for alternative options to be explored. She added that the EU will stop crude imports within six months, and refine imports by 2022.
- So, we increase the pressure on Russia and minimize collateral damage to us, our partners around the world, because we have to ensure that our economy is strong in order to help Ukraine.
What’s at stake? About 25% of the gas used by EU member countries comes from Russia. The International Energy Agency data shows that the EU purchased approximately 2.3 million barrels of Russian crude oil per day, or half of all Russian exports in 2021.
- Although the EU has imposed many rounds of sanctions against Russia since the invasion of Ukraine, it has not yet followed the U.S. or the U.K. with outright bans on oil imports.
- On Wednesday, prices of both U.S. and European Brent crude oil rose somewhat, with U.S. crude at $108 while Brent was at $110 per barrel on Wednesday afternoon, even though the EU proposal was already long-anticipated.
All EU member states would have to vote on the proposed ban.
While von der Leyen did not identify the members concerned about their reliance on Russian energy, Hungarian government spokesman Zoltan Kovacs tweeted Wednesday morning: We do not see any plans or guarantees on how a transition could be managed based on the current proposals, and how HUs energy security would be guaranteed.
Congress last month passed a bill codifying a U.S. ban on Russian oil imports, though Europe has struggled to quickly follow suit.
You can read more about the announcement here.
Republicans target SEC climate proposal
Republicans on Congress’ Oversight and Reform Committee target the Securities and Exchange Commissions (SEC), which proposed a rule that would require companies and individuals to disclose their contributions to climate change.
The Hill first received a Wednesday correspondence from 19 Republicans asking for information and documents.
They wrote that the American people have a right of inquiry about the effect of the Rule on their ability to access affordable goods or services.
They also called the proposed rule an overly broad expansion of the SECs authority and said it contravenes the mission of the agency.
The lawmakers asked for the committees communications relating to the proposal, as well as any communications with the White House National Economic Counsel and outside groups that may have occurred.
What does this all mean? Republicans, as members of the minority party are limited in their oversight power. However, the issues they focus on now may give insight into what they will pursue if the majority is retaken next year.
The Hill reached out the SEC for comments.
The regulation in question would require companies to reveal to investors both ways in which climate change may threaten their financial stability and also information about their own contributions to climate change.
It was first proposed by Allison Lee, SEC Commissioner. She defended it in March. She noted that physical and transition climate risks can manifest in financial markets in the form credit risk, market risk or insurance, reputational risk, liquidity risk, supply chain risk and supply chain risk.
Find out more about the letter.
PENTAGON HALTS BURNING ‘FOREVER CHEMICALS’
According to a new memo, the Defense Department will temporarily stop burning toxic chemicals forever until it issues guidance on how to dispose of them.
In the memo, dated last week Paul Cramer, who is acting as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment, said the military would issue a temporary prohibition on incineration of a class of chemicals known as PFAS.
He wrote that DoD has not yet issued the required guidance and must immediately cease contracting for incineration of any PFAS materials, including firefighting foam.
PFAS is a group of chemicals that have been linked to cancers, and other illnesses. They are used in household products such as waterproof clothing and nonstick pans. They also have been used to make military firefighting foam.
The Air Force said in 2017 that burning these chemicals as a means for disposing of them could produce environmentally unsatisfactory byproducts including those that may be toxic or contribute to climate change.
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl compounds, also known as PFAS, are sometimes called “forever chemicals” because they can linger in the environment and in the body.
Learn more about the memo.
COMMITTEE UPDATE
- Wednesday was a productive day for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.Amendment KigaliAn international agreement that will reduce the use of superpolluting fluorocarbons (HFCs). HFCs, which are planet-warming gases, can be hundreds to thousands times more powerful than carbon dioxide. They are used often as refrigerants. The amendment was passed by voice vote. However, Sen. John Barrasso (R.Wyo.) opposed the advancement. According to a spokesperson for the Republican committee, the request was to be recorded as voting against advancement. Congress has however already passed legislation that would reduce the use of HFCs starting in 2020.
- Wednesday’s unanimous approval by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee of Wednesday was unanimous.Water Resources Development ActThe bill, which is passed every other year, allows flood control and ecosystem restoration.
ON TAP TOMORROW
A hearing will be held by the Senate Energy Committee to examine budget estimates and justifications for fiscal year 2023 of the Department of Energy. Jennifer Granholm, Energy Secretary, is scheduled to testify.
WHAT WE’RE READING
- The Associated Press: Haitian gangs make it dangerous for marine biologists (The Associated Press).
- Mountain Valley Pipeline: Another delay and cost increase (The Roanoke Times).
- CNBC reports that Volkswagen is extending its coal use in response to Russian energy threats.
- Japan Says it Needs Nuclear Power Can Host Communities Ever Trust It Again (The New York Times).
- Feds file appeal to re-list gray Wolf as endangered (MLIVE).
Finally, something a little off-beat and unusual:Going off-scripture
This concludes today’s post. We appreciate your reading. For the latest news and coverage, check out The HillsEnergy & Environment. We hope to see you again tomorrow.
VIEW THE COMPLETE VERSION HERE