Archives for November 2019

Manufacturing is a backbone for the Texas economy. In 2016 alone, it generated $218 billion dollars for Texas – nearly 15% of the state’s GDP – and directly supported 845,000 jobs. Economic output from manufacturing in Texas has nearly doubled in size since 1997, growing by 98.7% and rapidly outpacing Texas’ GDP overall.

However, this rosy picture hides challenges facing manufacturing labor. Since 1997, employment in Texas manufacturing has declined 19%. This can largely be attributed to advances in technology and automation. By assigning routine tasks to increasingly affordable machines, companies can easily increase productivity while reducing operating costs.

New technologies have changed the skills required of manufacturing workers to include programming proficiency, data analysis, and management.  This has created an industry-wide “skills gap”: employers cannot find workers with appropriate skills, and workers do not have the skills to obtain open jobs. Across the U.S., this could cause 2.4 million manufacturing positions to remain unfilled by 2028. Texas is especially vulnerable to this labor disruption, with one-quarter of jobs in Houston at risk of displacement. The size of this problem requires bold action.

Worker retraining provides the most straightforward solution to address the skills gap. Currently, Texas supports retraining through the Skills Development Program. Administered by the Texas Workforce Commission, the program provides grants to businesses that want to retrain their workers.

While the program has seen some success – about 16,000 workers benefitted in 2016 – it does not present a viable solution for the scale of this technological revolution. It requires community colleges to conduct retraining, even though this is often inaccessible to many workers. Retraining programs are narrowly tailored, focusing on specific skills rather than a worker’s long-term growth. Finally, it puts workers’ economic prospects in the hands of one business. For Texas to deal with this skills gap, its retraining must demonstrate greater flexibility.

Fortunately, the program only requires a small adjustment. Texas should supply Skills Development Grants to non-profits dedicated to retraining workers. Non-profits are focused the needs of workers, not a single business, and are thus more motivated to facilitate retraining programs with long-term benefits. Non-profits could host their own skills development classes at times and mediums more comfortable for workers.

Project Quest in San Antonio serves as a model for such a third-party organization. The organization provides skills training for workers, supplemented by professional and personal support. While the program is not cheap – spending approximately $11,000 per trainee – it has been lauded for its success. With support from the Skills Development Program, organizations like Project Quest could expand across the state.

Technology promises to revolutionize manufacturing. This will not eliminate the need for manufacturing labor; rather, it will change the skills required of workers. Relying on businesses to submit grants places worker’s training prospects entirely in the hands of their employer. Redirecting Skills Development Program grant funds to third-party organizations will allow for more flexible, sustainable training. The Texas Workforce Commission should make this change immediately to prepare for the upcoming labor displacement.

According to NASA, damages resulting from climate change have the potential to devastate the US, with citizens experiencing life-altering and even life-threatening changes, especially in the West, South, and Southwest (“Effects”). The EPA reports that the global warming potential of methane is “more than 25 times that of carbon dioxide,” and in the US, the oil and natural gas industry is the largest industrial source of harmful methane emissions (“Understanding”, Daly). With the social, economic, and environmental costs of climate change and air pollution constantly rising, the US must collaborate with oil and gas companies to reduce methane emissions in order to remain a global leader in environmental action and act as a steward for future generations.

As of 2017, the EPA no longer requires oil and gas companies to report methane emissions data, information about production equipment, and emissions control practices. However, without emissions data, the EPA cannot hold companies accountable for their environmental impact, nor can it track and reward potential improvements in controlling emissions. Furthermore, without information about the steps that companies are currently taking to curtail their emissions, the EPA cannot collaborate with them to build on that work. In fact, the EPA used the information gathered in the previous requests to refine its New Source Performance Standards, making them both more effective at reducing methane emissions and more sensitive to what companies could reasonably achieve.

To ensure that the US can continue to serve as a domestic environmental steward of the environment and to encourage private industry to participate in positive climate action, policymakers must follow the mandate set forth in the Clean Air Act to control air pollution and extend it to once again require companies to report methane data.

Administrator Pruitt asserted that collecting these data would be too costly for the industry (EPA Media Relations). However, the initial information request integrated feedback from both informal and formal discussions with industry addressing both the usefulness of the information and the potential burden on companies, and the final request narrowed the burden and lowered the costs of collecting the data to $3,000 per covered entity (Carper et al.). In fact, the EPA could even use the data for the benefit of oil and gas companies, supporting their business by incentivizing them to comply with methane regulations through tax breaks or public recognition. Moreover, in May 2017, a Republican-controlled Senate voted with Democrats to reject efforts to repeal the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) methane waste rule, indicating strong bipartisan support for regulations reducing methane emissions (DeGette).

By once again requiring companies to report these data, the US can better cooperate with the oil and gas industry to curb methane emissions. Strong, thoughtful climate action protects and serves all US citizens, and policymakers must continue to seek reliable data to inform the government’s response to the growing crisis of climate change. Only then can the US continue to act as a leader in global climate action.

Sources Cited

Carper, Tom, et al. Letter to Scott Pruitt. 6 Apr. 2017, www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/b6ec4e09-9ab1-40fa-96ad-a5c56aff7949/letter-to-epa-administrator-pruitt-on-icr-withdrawal.pdf.

Daly, Matthew. “EPA withdraws Obama-era request for data on oil, natural gas.” AP News, www.wsj.com/articles/epa-withdraws-obama-era-requirement-for-companies-to-provide-methane-data-1488500610. Accessed 26 Sept. 2019.

DeGette, Diana, et al. “DeGette Calls on Pruitt to Reissue Canceled Information Request on Methane Emissions.” 27 June 2018, degette.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/degette-calls-on-pruitt-to-reissue-canceled-information-request-on.

“The Effects of Climate Change.” NASA, climate.nasa.gov/effects/.

EPA Media Relations. “EPA Withdraws Information Request for the Oil and Gas Industry.” 2 Mar. 2017, www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-withdraws-information-request-oil-and-gas-industry?mod=article_inline.

“Understanding Global Warming Potentials.” EPA, www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials. Accessed 10 Oct. 2019.

In light of water crises in Flint and Newark, the EPA has issued long-awaited revisions to its 1991 Lead and Copper Rule. For the first time, water utilities will be required to test for lead in the drinking water at our nation’s schools and childcare facilities. But this improvement does not rectify the two main problems with the new regulation: an outdated lead action level and a sluggish replacement rate for lead pipes.

 

Lead infrastructure has had cascading impacts on the drinking water supply and public health. Six million lead service lines, which connect buildings to water mains, still bring water to our taps today. The World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control, and American Academy of Pediatrics unanimously agree that no safe amount of lead exposure exists. The accumulation of lead in adolescents frequently causes irreversible damage to the brain and nervous system and triggers severe learning and behavioral problems. For these reasons, the new regulation is not commensurate with the dangers lead poses.

 

In particular, the current lead action level of 15 ppb does not reflect the best available science and ignores international standards. The action level only requires water utilities to take corrective steps once lead levels register above the 15 ppb limit. However, the EPA’s own maximum contaminant level goal, or the amount of safe exposure, is zero. So leaving the action level unchanged is incongruent with protecting public health. Additionally, water systems exceeding the 15 ppb limit will now have 20 extra years to replace lead service lines. That’s because the EPA lowered the replacement rate from seven percent to just three percent, leaving the next generation of American children to consume contaminated tap water at their homes, schools, and daycares.

 

To better protect public health, the EPA must require a five ppb action level. And it must mandate the removal of all six million lead services lines within the next 20 years to safeguard our drinking water. A lower lead action level will force more water utilities to undertake mandatory corrosion control and required replacement of lead pipes. Further, a five ppb action level is consistent with regulations in Canada and the European Union. As a result, federal drinking water regulations would not only be equal to those of other global environmental leaders but will be more protective than existing domestic examples, such as Michigan’s 12 ppb level.

 

Michigan has adopted other aggressive measures that the EPA should emulate. It has, for example, pledged to pull all 460,000 lead services lines — 7.5 percent of the national total — out of the ground within just 20 years. Washington state has made a similar 15-year promise. The EPA must follow suit by setting a 20-year deadline to get all harmful lead pipes out of service. The American Water Works Association, a conglomerate of 4,300 water utilities responsible for 80 percent of the nation’s drinking water, supports removing lead service lines, as does the EPA’s National Drinking Water Advisory Council.

 

I must acknowledge a hefty price tag of up to $80 billion to replace all lead service lines. Even still, this one-time investment pales in comparison to the estimated $50 billion annual cost of childhood lead exposure. For every dollar the EPA invests in controlling lead hazards, we can expect up to $221 back in health benefits, increased IQ, higher lifetime wages, better tax contributions, less special education, and reduced crime rates. It’s a return on investment similar to vaccines — and it will immunize our children against the dangers of lead. By adopting a revised lead rule as I laid out above, the EPA can serve as a protector of our nation’s children and as a responsible steward of our water.