Two chemical industry groups are asking President Trump for a complete exemption to free their factories from new limits on hazardous air pollution. Under a new rule finalized by the Biden administration last year, chemical plants would soon be required to monitor and reduce emissions of toxic pollutants, like ethylene oxide, a cancer-causing ingredient used in antifreeze and plastics.
Now the two groups, the American Chemistry Council and the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, which represent the nation’s major chemical companies, are seeking a temporary presidential waiver for all polluters to the rule. The request came after the E.P.A. told companies last month that they could apply for waivers to major clean-air rules by emailing the agency. The E.P.A. pointed to a section of the Clean Air Act that enables the president to temporarily exempt industrial facilities from new rules if the technology required to meet those rules isn’t available, and if it’s in the interest of national security.
Under Mr. Trump, the E.P.A. has moved to roll back many of the same rules. That could mean that companies granted a temporary exemption now would ultimately never have to comply with the new rules.
The Biden-era rule had been part of that administration’s effort to address the disproportionate effect of environmental hazards facing communities near chemical plants. These are often low-income, predominantly Black or Latino neighborhoods with elevated rates of asthma, cancer and other health problems. It updates several regulations governing emissions from chemical plants, some of which have not been tightened in nearly 20 years, and applies to more than 200 chemical facilities across Texas and Louisiana, as well as the Ohio River Valley and West Virginia — all home to major chemical hubs.
The rule had for the first time considered the cumulative effects of multiple chemical plants on communities in such hubs, rather than simply the effect of a single source of pollution. Companies would be required to rigorously tighten controls and processes to limit chemical emissions. They would also be required to monitor smokestacks and vents at the manufacturing facilities, while also checking whether chemicals are present at the property line of a plant. That kind of fence-line monitoring is similar to those required of petroleum refineries.
But the chemical industry had raised various concerns about the new restrictions, particularly on ethylene oxide, saying it was used in a variety of products like batteries for electric vehicles. It also is essential to sterilizing medical equipment, according to the Food and Drug Administration. In a statement on Saturday, Chet Thompson, chief executive of American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, called the Biden-era rule “unlawful, unreasonable and technologically unachievable,” adding that it put “critical U.S. manufacturing operations at risk.”
The latest move is part of an effort by the Trump administration to steer the E.P.A. away from its original role of environmental protection and regulation. Mr. Zeldin has described the agency’s new mission as lowering the cost of purchasing cars, heating homes and running businesses, as well as encouraging American energy dominance. Last month, the administration dropped a federal lawsuit against a chemical manufacturer accused of releasing high levels of chloroprene, a likely carcinogen, from a plant in Louisiana.
The E.P.A. has said it plans to slash jobs, eliminate its scientific research arm and ensure that enforcement actions don’t interfere with energy production. It also aims to reduce the agency’s overall budget by 65 percent. The Trump administration has also placed former lobbyists and lawyers for the oil, gas and chemical industries in senior positions at the agency.

@linter, thanks for your research and post, providing conclusive evidence of what most of us already knew, Teched1000 is a fraud.
His reply, with two links to nowhere (sic) and his rambling psycho-babble post about general investment BS and references back to 2020 and 2022 (Say what?) are testament to it. You don't have to have 35+ years of audit experience to know that 500+ word responses about everything but the simple question that was posed/issue that was raised indicate, well, in technical accounting terms, bullshit.

Retired Treasury bond manager Robert Kessler has always been skeptical of Wall Street’s “stocks for the long term” mantra. He explains why he is completely out of stocks in his personal portfolio—and why you should consider doing the same.

“…it’s a huge, and usually fatal, mistake to design a portfolio without focusing primarily on those approximately 2% of times that will cause you to lose your nerve and violate Charlie Munger’s prime directive of compounding. As Munger, who is Warren Buffett’s partner, puts it: ‘The first rule of compounding is to never interrupt it unnecessarily.’
…..holding plenty of safe assets—like dull, low-yielding Treasury securities—and being prepared to see your risky assets get periodically, and hopefully temporarily, slaughtered.”
- William Bernstein

Even though I had cash to invest during the pandemic, I hesitated - caught between wanting to exit or take a chance to buy while the market was low. I chose to hold what I had and invested only small amounts at the edges, kicking myself later for the missed opportunity.
So even though this time *may be different* I deployed dry powder at the edges on both Thursday and Friday, keeping enough in reserve to see us through the next 2-3 years if necessary.
The U.S. is not going out of business, but we’re all aboard a ship run by fools.

If you were sure that Tariffs have a high correlation to the stock market, why didn't you sell weeks ago?
Guess who is at 99+% in MM and hardly lost anything.

“This is why Warren Buffett just said Trump is making the best economic moves he’s seen in over 50 years,” the video says.