Welcome to Thursday’s Overnight Energy & Environment,Your source for the most recent news on energy, the environment, and beyond. Subscribe here thehill.com/newsletter-signup.
Today, we’ll be looking at the climate push during a closely watched Democratic primary. We’ll also be reviewing new climate considerations for natural gaz pipeline reviews and “forever toxic” lawsuits from firefighters.
We are Rachel Frazin and Zack Budryk for The Hill. Send us your tips: [email protected] [email protected]. Follow us on Twitter: @RachelFrazin @BudrykZack.
Let’s get going.
Progressives target Cuellar over fossil fuel ties
[[{“fid”:”251952″,”view_mode”:”wysiwyg”,”fields”:{“format”:”wysiwyg”,”alignment”:””,”field_file_image_alt_text[und][0][value]”:false,”field_file_image_title_text[und][0][value]”:false,”field_url[und][0][value]”:”The Hill, Greg Nash/AP, Eric Gay”,”field_free_html[und][0][value]”:””,”field_free_html[und][0][format]”:”full_html”},”link_text”:null,”type”:”media”,”field_deltas”:{“1”:{“format”:”wysiwyg”,”alignment”:””,”field_file_image_alt_text[und][0][value]”:false,”field_file_image_title_text[und][0][value]”:false,”field_url[und][0][value]”:”The Hill, Greg Nash/AP, Eric Gay”,”field_free_html[und][0][value]”:””,”field_free_html[und][0][format]”:”full_html”}},”attributes”:{“height”:363,”width”:645,”class”:”media-element file-wysiwyg”,”data-delta”:”1″}}]]
Progressives and environmental groups want to make Jessica Cisneros (Texas’s primary rematch) a referendum about Rep. Henry Cuellar, Texas’s nine-term House Democrat,’s fossil-fuel-industry ties and their lackluster support of the party’s broader climate agenda.
Cisneros was an immigration lawyer and once interned in Cuellar’s office. In 2020, Cisneros lost to him by less than 3000 votes. Green groups are optimistic about Cisneros’ chances in the March 1 contest in Texas’s 28th district. They cite dynamics that were absent in the previous race.
Progressives have always been critical about Cuellar’s ties with the oil industry. They call him “Big Oil’s favorite Democrat”. But they are now focusing their attention on last year’s Texas winter storms and President Biden’s stalled climate agenda to attack the House Democrat.
“We’re now a year into a Democratic triofecta in that one of the greatest threats to the success for the Biden presidency is folks with a D next their name who don’t actually want to advance the Democratic agenda and Rep. Cuellar,” said Leah Greenberg of Indivisible, executive director.
So, what do they have to say? Opponents are quick and proud to highlight Cuellar’s energy ties. According to OpenSecrets data, Cuellar has received $151,500 in contributions from oil and gas companies during this election cycle. Cisneros is opposed to a Green New Deal. He believes that the way we address climate change must be as aggressive and dangerous as it is.
Ellen Sciales, spokesperson for Sunrise Movement, stated that environmentalists are also unhappy with Cuellar’s record on climate policy under the Biden administration.
Cuellar was among nine centrist House Democrats that pushed Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., to introduce the bipartisan infrastructure bill prior to the larger reconciliation measure. The Senate has been unable to pass Build Back Better, a more ambitious package, and progressives blame the decision not to separate the bills.
But…Cisneros is different from other progressives such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D.N.Y.), who have successfully challenged moderate incumbents. They were elected to a solidly Democratic district, while Texas has 28ThPurple is more.
So, what’s Cuellar’s take? Cuellar has rebuked many progressive policies associated with the “Squad”, a group of progressive representatives, even before Cisneros’s challenge. He claimed in 2019 that the Green New Deal would result in the loss of thousands of jobs in Texas’s Webb County.
A Cuellar staffer pointed out the 40,000 jobs in the 28th district that are oil-and-gas-related, as well the billions of income taxes the industry generates for the district’s economy and infrastructure.
Staffer called the notion that the congressman is a slave to the oil lobby “ridiculous”, and pointed out his 97 percent voting record, which was in line with the Biden administration.
He said, “I don’t know anyone who’s in the pocketof Big Oil who would have such a voting record.”
What about Cisneros? Cisneros meanwhile argued that progressive environmental policies don’t have to be a non-starter in a more moderate area.
“I cannot go to someone’s house and ask them what their thoughts are about the Green New Deal. They don’t know what it means,” she stated in 2020. “We’re trying to understand what it means: infrastructure investment in solar and winds more than anything else, and what jobs this could create here. People are motivated by jobs.
Feds To weigh the climate contribution of pipelines
A federal agency that decides whether to approve natural gas pipelines or reject them will now consider the project’s contributions to climate change.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which voted on Thursday to determine whether a project is in public interest, examined greenhouse gas (GHG), emissions from construction and operation of the project as well as emissions from when the gas is eventually burned to make electricity.
Environmental advocates have long criticised the agency for failing to consider these impacts in its reviews. They have also argued that it should stop approval of as many pipelines in the future as it has in the past.
According to a 2020 investigationBy House Democrats have approved over 99 percent of all pipeline projects in the past 20 years.
The proposal was supported by three Democratic commissioners at FERC, but it was opposed by its two Republican members.
Chairman Richard Glick (D), said that the new policy allows the commission to find that benefits outweigh costs, even if the project has significant climate change impacts.
He also argued the decision will provide legal certainty since courts can block FERC projects based on environmental concerns.
Glick stated that if the commission continued to ignore climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, it would only add to the legal uncertainty of each project approval order by the commission.
James Danly, Republican Commissioner of the Union, disagreed.
He stated that the contents of the Natural Gas Act were “very amorphous.” “It is very difficult for us to achieve the objectives of the Natural Gas Act, which is to encourage the orderly development of natural gas infrastructure…when we’re adopting policies that are either vague or make it difficult to rationally allocate capital.”
Although the guidance was issued temporarily, it will be effective immediately. The agency is currently taking public comments on the guidance and may make any necessary changes based upon that feedback.
In the meantime, the agency announced that it would update its guidelines to review them in general, including taking into account impacts on communities that are disproportionately harmed from pollution.
Learn more about the agency’s moves by clicking here
FIREFIGHTERS ARE FIXING PFAS (IN COURT).
Hundreds of firefighters across the country are suing over health effects from exposure to “forever chemical” materials and equipment used in their job.
More than a dozen firefighters from Massachusetts recently attributed their cancer to the chemicals.
In December, 15 former and current firefighters from the state claimed that they had elevated levels of the chemicals – perfluoroalkyl compounds or PFAS – in their blood. The plaintiffs claim that they were exposed to chemicals through firefighting foam, “turnout”, coats, and other means. All 15 plaintiffs have some form cancer. They blame PFAS exposure.
The lawsuit names 25 defendants. They are accused of manufacturing, selling, or distributing the products knowing the health risks. Major firms like Carrier, DuPont, and 3M are among the plaintiffs.
“The Firefighter Plaintiffs wore turnouts, were exposed to Class A foam in the normal and usual course of firefighting duties and training, and were frequently exposed to PFAS at their workplace. They did not know, and could not have known with reasonable diligence that these products contained PFAS. The filing also states that they did not know that PFAS was in the blood and bodies of their employees. “Defendants at all relevant times and continuing into the present have stated that their turnouts as well as Class B foams were safe.”
Elizabeth Pritzker, whose Pritzker Levine firm is handling the lawsuit, said to The Hill that the firm is in touch in multidistrict litigationSimilar allegations were made in South Carolina and the suit will likely be combined into that suit. She added that “our ultimate goal is to clean-up the industry.”
Find out more about this suit here.
COMING SOON FROM HILL
Register now NotedDC: The HillInsider TakeThe heartbeat of politics, policy.
WHAT WE’RE READING
-
The union president says Warrior Met Coal strikers are ‘keep that company profitable,’ telling the US Senate.AL.com)
-
Study concludes that oil firms’ climate claims are greenwashingThe Guardian)
-
Is EPA going to be appointed an environmental justice boss? (E&E News)
-
The world spends 6,000x more on environmentally harmful subsidies (compared to carbon offsets)Quartz)
Finally, something a little off-beat and unusual: Who let the dog out?
That’s all for today. Thank you for reading. Check out The Hill. Energy & Environment PageGet the latest news and coverage. We will see you Friday.