Environment

Many major business groups, including the NAM, are calling on Congress to preserve funding and resources for ENERGY STAR, a federal program that promotes energy efficiency in consumer products (E&E News, subscription).

The request: “Clear legislative authorization backs ENERGY STAR as a voluntary public–private partnership run by the federal government,” more than 30 business groups told legislators.

• “We respectfully request that ENERGY STAR not be supplanted by nongovernmental efforts that could significantly alter and overly complicate the program.”

The background: Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin has announced plans to restructure the agency, including by eliminating the Office of Atmospheric Protection, which manages the ENERGY STAR program.

• The ENERGY STAR program sets efficiency standards for a range of products and materials, including air conditioners and heat pumps, allowing them to display the program’s logo if they meet the criteria.

Why it matters: “Electricity saved by ENERGY STAR helps free up space on the grid needed so the U.S. can lead the world to power and grow artificial intelligence, support the burgeoning crypto asset industry and bring more manufacturing plants back to our shores,” the associations said.

The NAM’s take: “The ENERGY STAR program is a prime example of how federal agencies should be partnering with the industry to promote energy-efficient products that save money for consumers,” said NAM Director of Energy and Resources Policy Mike Davin.

• “Instead of imposing top-down regulations, ENERGY STAR brings together the public and private sectors on a voluntary basis to create a win–win–win outcome for consumers, the environment and the economy.”

The Environmental Protection Agency’s announcement Wednesday that it plans to repeal the previous administration’s power plant regulations “is a critical and welcome step toward rebalanced regulations and American energy dominance,” NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons said yesterday.

What’s going on: EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said at a Wednesday press conference that Biden-era limits on greenhouse gas emissions from gas- and coal-fired power plants “suffocate our economy in order to protect the environment” (CBS News).

• The rules the EPA is proposing to roll back mandated that existing coal-fired plants and new natural gas–fired plants reduce or capture 90% of their emissions by 2032, among other requirements.
• Finalized by the previous administration in 2024, the regulations also contained an unrealistic timeline for power plants to adopt new technologies, especially given the need for permitting reform, the NAM said in April 2024.

Why it’s important: The 2024 power plant rules are a threat to affordable baseload energy—which manufacturers require to do their jobs—and put grid security at risk, Timmons said.

• “Repealing this unbalanced rule will enhance manufacturers’ access to America’s abundant energy resources and ensure that the industry has the power it needs to drive the American economy.”

NAM in the news: The Washington Examiner cited the NAM’s response to the EPA decision, quoting Timmons’ statement.

Washington, D.C. – In response to the EPA’s decision to repeal the 2024 power plant rule, a key priority for the National Association of Manufacturers’ ongoing efforts to rebalance federal regulations and unleash American energy, NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons issued the following statement:

“The EPA’s decision to repeal the unworkable power plant rule for existing coal-fired and new natural gas-fired power plants is a critical and welcome step toward rebalanced regulations and American energy dominance. This change will strengthen grid reliability and support manufacturing growth in the United States.

“From the onset, the NAM has warned that this rule would undermine the stability of our electric grid and impose unworkable mandates on critical energy infrastructure. The rule’s unrealistic timeline for power plants to adopt certain emerging technologies to commercial scale made it infeasible—undermining America’s energy security and hampering America’s leadership in next generation technologies like AI. Existing natural gas plants are critical to powering manufacturing in the United States—providing affordable, reliable baseload energy to continuously support industry. By layering new regulations on an already overburdened electric grid, the rule was putting our energy security at risk. Repealing this unbalanced rule will enhance manufacturers’ access to America’s abundant energy resources and ensure that the industry has the power it needs to drive the American economy.”

Background: Today’s action builds on the momentum from a December 2024 NAM-led letter to the transition team, signed by more than 100  manufacturing organizations, detailing regulatory actions the incoming administration could take to right-size regulations that stunted manufacturing growth and job creation—including the power plant rule. It also implements one of the key recommendations from the letter the NAM sent to 10 federal agencies in April, including the EPA,  identifying the power plant rule as one of the most burdensome regulations facing manufacturers and urging a rebalanced approach to strengthen, rather than strain, U.S. manufacturing. Last year, the NAM endorsed Rep. Balderson’s (OH-12) Congressional Review Act resolution that would have blocked implementation of this rule.

-NAM-

The National Association of Manufacturers is the largest manufacturing association in the United States, representing small and large manufacturers in every industrial sector and in all 50 states. Manufacturing employs nearly 13 million men and women, contributes $2.93 trillion to the U.S. economy annually and accounts for 53% of private-sector research and development. The NAM is the powerful voice of the manufacturing community and the leading advocate for a policy agenda that helps manufacturers compete in the global economy and create jobs across the United States. For more information about the NAM or to follow us on Twitter and Facebook, please visit www.nam.org.

The previous administration’s significant regulatory changes issued under the Clean Air Act—in particular, its unworkable tightening of allowable soot levels—will create hardship for local economies and must be revised, the NAM told the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment ahead of a hearing today.

• Manufacturers that fail to meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards will be unable to obtain permits to either construct new facilities or expand existing facilities, the NAM pointed out.

What’s going on: In 2024, the Environmental Protection Agency lowered the primary annual standard for fine particulate matter (PM2.5, or soot) from 12 micrograms per cubic meter to 9 μg/m3 .

• “By lowering the standard to 9 μg/m3, which is essentially the same as the background levels that naturally occur in the environment across the nation, the Biden EPA was increasing the number of industrial centers and U.S. population hubs that would be placed into nonattainment status,” NAM Managing Vice President of Policy Charles Crain said.
• In the past 25 years, thanks to manufacturer-developed technologies, U.S. air quality has seen a 37% reduction in PM2.5, Crain continued, adding that an EPA analysis found that less than 20% of PM2.5 emissions come from industrial processes or stationary fuel consumption. Most of it is from sources well outside manufacturers’ control, such as wildfires and crop and livestock dust.

Why it’s important: Enacting the Biden-era tightened standards would mean severe economic losses for the U.S., the NAM told the subcommittee.

• An NAM-commissioned Oxford Economics study found that a standard just slightly stricter than the one set by the Biden administration—8 μg/m3—“would result in a loss of $162.4 billion to $197.4 billion in economic activity and put 852,100 to 973,900 jobs at risk, both directly from manufacturing and indirectly from supply chain spending.”

What they’re doing: In today’s hearing, the House Energy and Commerce Committee discussed two draft pieces of legislation, both supported by the NAM, that would reform the process for establishing NAAQS, which the Clean Air Act mandates the EPA set. The measures include:

• The Clean Air and Economic Advancement Reform (CLEAR) Act, which would make the NAAQS process more workable for manufacturers while “maintaining the regulatory guardrails that protect the health and welfare of our local communities,” according to the NAM; and
• The Clean Air and Building Infrastructure Improvement Act, which “seeks to inject clearer guidance into the process for obtaining preconstruction permits and meeting compliance requirements under a revised NAAQS.”

Our take: “Manufacturers strongly support the Energy and Commerce Committee’s efforts to address policy challenges with the NAAQS and to explore solutions that will pave the way for greater investment in the infrastructure that will allow America to compete in the 21st century,” Crain concluded.

The U.S. Supreme Court has put limits on a procedural requirement that has become a major roadblock for infrastructure and energy projects: environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act.

The background: The predecessor of substantive statutes like the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts, NEPA is the “the single most litigated environmental statute,” NAM Vice President and Deputy General Counsel Erica Klenicki told us.

• In this case, local government and environmental groups brought a NEPA challenge to the Surface Transportation Board’s approval of an 88-mile rail line in Utah’s Uinta Basin, which would connect to the national rail network and carry crude oil to refinery markets along the Gulf Coast.
• The board approved the project after issuing a comprehensive, 3,600 page environmental impact statement under NEPA.
• But that wasn’t enough—the D.C. Circuit blocked the board’s approval, ruling that its exhaustive analysis failed to consider the repercussions of more oil production made possible by the rail line. It contended that the board should have considered the potential impact of increased oil refining on Gulf coast communities thousands of miles away—even though the board had no power at all to control for those effects.

The issue: The NAM filed an amicus brief in the case, urging the court to reject the premise adopted by the D.C. Circuit—that NEPA requires agencies to analyze the effects of upstream or downstream projects over which they do not exercise regulatory authority.

• Yesterday, the justices ruled 8–0 (Justice Neil Gorsuch recused himself) that the board did not have to consider such sweeping effects when evaluating whether to approve a project.

What they said: “NEPA is a procedural cross-check, not a substantive roadblock,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote . “The goal of the law is to inform agency decision-making, not to paralyze it.”

• “Courts should review an agency’s [environmental impact statement] to check that it addresses the environmental effects of the project at hand. The EIS need not address the effects of separate projects,” Kavanaugh wrote. “In conducting that review, courts should afford substantial deference to the agency as to the scope and contents of the EIS.”

The NAM’s advocacy: The NAM has been a tireless proponent of limiting regulatory overreach, especially the out-of-control permitting process that strangles important new infrastructure and energy projects.

• “The congressional intent behind NEPA when it was passed was to make sure a specific project could be reviewed for its environmental impact—not to slow down progress on important economic growth,” said NAM Director of Energy and Resources Policy Michael Davin. “The U.S. should learn from other nations and review projects for environmental impacts without taking years and years to approve them.”

Antora Energy has an energy storage solution that could transform American manufacturing.

Antora builds thermal batteries that draw in locally produced electricity when it’s cheap and plentiful, converting it into heat stored in solid blocks of carbon. That energy can be delivered 24/7 to manufacturers as affordable, reliable energy. It’s a solution that is both modular and scalable, capable of serving small and large manufacturers alike.

• “We’re taking local energy from sources that are already near factories, at times when nobody else wants it and it would otherwise be wasted, and delivering it to American manufacturers,” said Antora Chief Operations Officer Justin Briggs. “It helps the factory become more competitive and stabilizes the local grid.”

Promoting U.S. energy: Antora’s batteries are manufactured in the U.S., using a domestic supply chain that avoids reliance on critical minerals (which must often be imported from China).

• The core of the battery is a form of inexpensive, low- to medium-grade graphite that is often a byproduct of coal mining or petroleum refining—an abundant resource across the U.S.
• “This is an opportunity to build a new technology class in the United States, with American materials and American supply chains,” said Briggs. “From the very beginning, we can build in America to support U.S. manufacturers.”

Creating jobs: The company is excited about the opportunity to create jobs in the United States—both at Antora itself and at the factories it supports.

• “We’re currently operating our first factory—a thermal battery gigafactory in San Jose, California—but that’s just the beginning,” said Briggs. “We’re already looking at a second factory, and more beyond that. We’re talking about being able to create a tremendous number of jobs around manufacturing hubs in the U.S.”

Leading a renaissance: Antora sees the chance not only to build a new industry, but also to help support the next generation of American manufacturing and global technological leadership.

• “[The U.S. has] a chance for a renaissance—to tap into these domestic, abundant energy resources and support manufacturing industries, from concrete and steel to chips and data centers,” said Briggs. “These are all sectors that need energy, and we can supply it cost-effectively.”

Overcoming hurdles: Briggs notes that electricity markets have been around for a long time—and as a result, regulatory hurdles designed by long-ago policymakers can get in the way of this new technology.

• “The rules that govern electricity markets were not designed to contemplate scenarios like this one,” said Briggs. “Thermal batteries bring huge benefits to industry and the electric grid, but it can be hard to do from a regulatory perspective. We’re working with regulators to open up markets to support these great project opportunities.”
• “We’re just trying to make sure there aren’t antiquated rules in the way, so we can help make American industry more competitive.”

The bottom line: “This is an opportunity to drive a resurgence in American manufacturing through cheap energy,” said Briggs. “We’re putting this energy to use to repower American industry.”

Washington, D.C. – Following the Environmental Protection Agency’s announcement on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in drinking water, National Association of Manufacturers President and CEO Jay Timmons issued the following response:

“We’re encouraged that the EPA has listened to the voices of manufacturers and extended the compliance deadline for unworkable national primary drinking water standards for PFOA and PFOS and committed to reconsidering the blatantly unlawful regulatory determinations for several other PFAS compounds.

“If the U.S. wants to stay a global manufacturing leader, we need practical, commonsense PFAS regulations. Manufacturers support science-based regulations that protect health and the environment and are in line with the Safe Drinking Water Act requirements. However, the Biden-era standards for PFOA and PFOS are deeply flawed, the costs they impose exceed any demonstrable benefit and the industries they harm include those vital to our national interests, including semiconductors, telecommunications and defense systems. The Pentagon has even raised alarms about long-term risks, including supply chain disruptions, that these standards would create.

“In addition to conflicting with manufacturers’ best interests, these standards also go against the Trump administration’s goal to make the U.S. the best place to build, grow and create jobs—a goal the administration is advancing by rebalancing regulations. The administration has done remarkable work to advance that goal, but today’s decision moves in the opposite direction.

“The decision runs counter to past efforts to cut red tape and boost manufacturing by putting shovels in the ground, more people to work, more products on the shelves and more prosperity into our communities. We don’t have to choose between supporting manufacturing and clean water in our communities.”

-NAM-

The National Association of Manufacturers is the largest manufacturing association in the United States, representing small and large manufacturers in every industrial sector and in all 50 states. Manufacturing employs nearly 13 million men and women, contributes $2.94 trillion to the U.S. economy annually and accounts for 53% of private-sector research and development. The NAM is the powerful voice of the manufacturing community and the leading advocate for a policy agenda that helps manufacturers compete in the global economy and create jobs across the United States. For more information about the NAM or to follow us on Twitter and Facebook, please visit www.nam.org.

The NAM is urging President Trump to reconsider the Biden administration’s misguided findings regarding new liquefied natural gas export permits, following the release of a Department of Energy study claiming that increased permit numbers would have negative effects on the nation.
 
What’s going on: The Department of Energy’s analysis, released Tuesday, holds “that ‘unfettered’ shipments of the fuel would make domestic prices rise … [and would] displace more renewables” (E&E News).

• However, the “report from Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm is clearly a politically motivated document designed for an audience who believes no form of carbon-based energy is acceptable,” NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons said. “LNG exports play a crucial role in reducing emissions by providing cleaner energy alternatives to countries reliant on higher emission sources.”   

What the ban’s done: The result of the Biden administration’s moratorium—issued in January—on the issuance of new U.S. LNG export permits has been “chilled energy investment, costing the country manufacturing jobs and holding us back from achieving energy dominance on the world stage,” Timmons continued.

• “The DOE’s report claims to be concerned about security, but the actions of this administration on LNG only serve to incentivize Europe to purchase natural gas from Russia.”  

A popular, key energy source: U.S. LNG is far cleaner than Russian LNG (House Energy and Commerce Committee). Furthermore, an October study by the NAM and PwC found that U.S. LNG is a significant and crucial contributor to gross domestic product, as well as an important source of jobs and federal, state and local taxes.

• What’s more, Americans want to keep exporting it. In a March NAM poll of 1,000 registered voters, more than 87% said they believe the U.S. should continue to export LNG.   

The bottom line: “The data is clear: LNG exports are a driving force for economic growth and job creation in the United States,” Timmons concluded. “Halting LNG export licenses as suggested would threaten nearly a million jobs and undermine our nation’s economic stability. The NAM asks President Trump to end this political war on the energy manufacturers that power our economy, fuel job growth and help ensure America’s national security.” 

In its current form, the Environmental Protection Agency’s recent proposal to add specific per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and PFAS categories to a database of toxic chemicals would place an unnecessary hardship on manufacturers, the NAM told the agency recently.
 
What’s going on: In October, the EPA published draft rules that would add 16 individual PFAS and 15 PFAS categories representing more than 100 individual PFAS to its Toxic Release Inventory, a list of potentially hazardous chemical release and waste management activities taking place in the U.S.

• Companies producing or manufacturing products with chemistries added to the TRI are required to complete and submit inventory forms each year for the chemicals they make and use over established limits.
• “The NAM believes this proposed rule will create unduly burdensome compliance requirements and increase costs for manufacturers and consumers as written,” NAM Vice President of Domestic Policy Chris Phalen said this month.

What should happen: The EPA should “adopt the following approaches to the proposed rulemaking”:

• Stay the proposal to give the public more time to comment on it.
• Revise the proposed PFAS and PFAS category additions to reflect “a meaningful baseline of scientific evidence” and ensure that “the scientific evidence justifying the listing[s] [is] supported by peer review and public comment.”
• List individually every PFAS added to the TRI and make each one identifiable.
• Narrow the group of PFAS listed as “chemicals of special concern” to reflect the scope of authority granted to the EPA by the fiscal year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act.

Why it’s important: “While the EPA estimates this proposed rule would result in up to 1,110 TRI reporting forms annually at an estimated cost of up to $6.6 million for its first year and up to $3.1 million for subsequent years, we anticipate the compliance costs to manufacturers will be significantly higher,” Phalen continued.

• If finalized as written, the rule will force manufacturers to hire additional workers and consultants, train employees on proper reporting processes, spend huge sums of money on testing and verifying results and much more.
• The result: “a costly drain on [manufacturers’] resources … [that] will lead to a rise in operational and production costs far above the EPA’s cost estimates for the proposed rule.”

At Milo’s Tea, every element of the company’s delicious beverages is scrutinized for sustainability opportunities—from bottle-sourcing to the water and tea leaves that go into each gallon.

The bottles: The Bessemer, Alabama–based business recently opened a new, one-gallon bottle-blowing facility in its hometown, right next to its distribution center.

• The new facility will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 1,000 metric tons per year, since it will eliminate the need for trucks to travel from farther-off bottling locations to the Bessemer distribution facility.

• “We’re still family-held, and sustainability is a family value, too,” said Chief Operating Officer Chris Droney. “When you have a project like this, that has a positive environmental impact and allows us to reinvest in our company growth, that’s a win–win.”

The water: The 78-year-old Milo’s Tea—which in 2022 became the top-selling refrigerated tea brand in the U.S. and is the fastest-growing refrigerated lemonade brand—has a strong track record of environmental resource preservation, starting with its water conservation.

• Since 2019, Milo’s has conserved nearly 37 million gallons of water, an achievement that has helped earn the certified woman-owned business two Platinum TRUE Zero Waste certifications (one for its Bessemer plant and another for its Tulsa, Oklahoma, facility).
• Among other measures, the company has invested in new, more water-efficient line-cleaning (clean-in-place) technology, which it uses between production runs to clean the brew, blend and filler equipment. “If we’re going from making sweet tea to zero-calorie tea, for example, it’s very important to make sure there’s no residue” in the lines, Droney explained.
• The enhanced equipment reduces energy, water and cleaning agent consumption, while also improving the effectiveness of the cleaning cycle. Milo’s made additional improvements to the production scheduling process, which decreased the total number of cleaning cycles required and further reduced energy, water and cleaning agent consumption.
• Milo’s was also able to reduce the amount of excess product the company had in its tanks during those flavor switchovers, further reducing waste and water use.

The tea: Milo’s earned its Oklahoma Zero Waste certification in part through “re-earthing” its tea leaves—“the largest waste stream we have”—in partnership with GEM Dirt, Droney said.

• The topsoil company takes Milo’s spent tea leaves and turns them into compost that it blends with dirt to create nutrient-rich soils. In 2023, Milo’s re-earthed more than 10,000 tons of used tea leaves from all facilities.

The packaging: When it comes to packaging, Milo’s doesn’t let dents stand in its way. The firm has installed compressed air stations on its lines to un-dent damaged bottles before they’re filled, so that none are thrown away.

• “At our flagship facility in Bessemer, if bottles can’t be undented, we send them back to the manufacturer and they can be reground and made into new bottles,” Droney continued. “A recycled bottle uses less resin than a new one.”

The production process: Milo’s has also recycled and diverted more than 148,000 tons of waste since 2019, another reason it has been so highly certified. On top of that, it has prioritized renewable energy sources at its facilities.

• Solar panels went live at the Bessemer plant in 2023, and this past summer, the business commissioned a rooftop solar farm at its Tulsa facility.
• The panels offset from 5% to 10% of each site’s total annual energy consumption, Droney told us. More solar panels are scheduled for other Milo’s sites, he added.

Advice for other manufacturers: Careful environmental stewardship can pay dividends for manufacturers, according to Droney.

• Profitability and sustainability “go hand in hand; we really believe that,” he said. “Solar power, onsite bottle blowing—there’s a cost to it, but there’s also a benefit. When you combine those, not only are you doing the right thing, but you’re generating fuel for future growth. We all have a responsibility to drive sustainability.”