EXTRACTED: Daily News Clips 12/16/22
PIPELINE NEWS
Press release: SENATOR MARKEY DEMANDS ANSWERS FROM KEYSTONE PIPELINE OPERATOR IN WAKE OF LATEST OIL SPILL
U.S. EPA: NEWS UPDATE #5: TC Energy Pipeline Rupture and Oil Discharge Near Washington, Kansas
Reuters: Keystone pipeline break spilled diluted bitumen, complicating cleanup
Kansas News Service: The Kansas Keystone pipeline spill isn't an ordinary oil spill. Here's why.
Financial Post: TC Energy restarts part of Keystone pipeline after oil spill
Nebraska Examiner: Part of Keystone pipeline restarts; 2,600 barrels of oil recovered at Kansas spill
Reuters: Enbridge to increase rationing of January oil pipeline space on Mainline system
The Dakota Scout: Two more counties sued over opposition to carbon pipeline
E&E News: CO2 pipeline developers: Iowa can't require safety info
Iowa Capital Dispatch: Attorneys tussle over land survey provisions for pipelines
Oelwein Daily Register: Zoning Commission hears concerns on CO2 pipeline
E&E News: FERC meeting: Pipeline win, transmission and Glick’s exit
Associated Press: Contested natural gas pipeline in Illinois, Missouri granted permanent certificate
Reuters: U.S. energy regulator approves Energy Transfer's Louisiana gas pipeline
Prairie Public Broadcasting: Pipeline company fined $50,000 for not following its approved corridor
WASHINGTON UPDATES
The Hill: Senate rejects Manchin’s energy permitting amendment to defense bill
E&E News: End of the line for permitting bill, but 2023 fight looms
Common Dreams: Climate Defenders Celebrate as Senate Rejects Manchin's Dirty Deal
Press release: Statement from President Joe Biden on Senator Joe Manchin’s Permitting Reform Proposal
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners: NARUC Letter Opposes New Transmission Permitting Proposal: Infringes on State Authority
Bloomberg: Manchin spurs US reversal on carbon capture funding in win for Big Oil
E&E News: DOE releases record funding for removing carbon
EXTRACTION
E&E News: High Gas Prices Make Methane Capture Profitable, Report Says
Down to Earth: Why did methane emissions spike in 2020? Study offers answers
Reuters: Canada's Greenfire Resources to list in U.S. via $780 million SPAC deal
CLIMATE FINANCE
E&E News: Europe's Biggest Bank Won't Back New Oil And Gas
Quartz: Ending finance for new oil and gas drilling projects is the minimum banks should do
OPINION
The Alpena News: We must enforce pipeline safety
New York Times: Big Oil Companies Are Bullies Who ‘Want to Be Seen as Good Guys’
RBN Energy: Ghosts Of Pipelines Past And Future - Beleaguered Appalachian Gas Pipelines Would Reduce Emissions
Food & Water Watch: How Much of This Hype for Hydrogen “Energy” is Just Smoke and Mirrors?
The Hill: It’s time for climate change to reach the International Court of Justice
PIPELINE NEWS
Press release: SENATOR MARKEY DEMANDS ANSWERS FROM KEYSTONE PIPELINE OPERATOR IN WAKE OF LATEST OIL SPILL
12/15/22
“Today, eight days after more than half a million gallons of crude oil began leaking from the Keystone pipeline, Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate, and Nuclear Safety, sent a letter to TC Energy, owner of the Keystone pipeline system, demanding answers and accountability for the oil spill – a disaster that is larger than all 22 previous Keystone pipeline spills combined and the biggest onshore U.S. spill in more than ten years. “The oil transported through your pipeline has left a trail of environmental devastation in its wake, from the disastrous effects of tar sand extraction on the land of the Cree, Dene, and Métis indigenous communities, to the direct damage that the frequent spills along its route cause,” wrote Senator Markey. “Enough is enough,” Senator Markey continued. “Communities threatened by your pipeline urgently need an explanation of how and why these spills keep happening, and whether your company will continue to put people nationwide and our environment at risk.” In his letter, Senator Markey asks TC Energy to provide responses to the following questions and requests for information by January 4, 2023: Please provide an update on the latest oil spill, including: the extent of the spill, including whether and to what extent it contaminated waterways, and a description of the types and locations of water quality monitoring underway post-spill; the estimated total amount of oil spilled and the total amount of oil removed, recovered, lost to evaporation, remaining to be recovered, and likely to be unrecoverable… “Was the section of pipeline that failed operating in compliance with American Petroleum Institute (API) Recommended Practice 1160 or API Recommended Practice 1173?.. “Please provide copies of the Material Safety Data Sheet, Spill Model report, the relevant Geographic Response Plan, and Facility Response Plan for the ruptured section of the pipeline. Were unredacted copies of these documents available to first responders in advance of the most recent spill?.. “Did the higher operating pressure of the pipeline affect its failure, the timing of the failure, or the amount of oil released in the 2017, 2019, and 2022 leaks?.. “Has TC Energy included spill response costs as an operational expense?.. “What support are you providing to local landowners and community members affected by the latest spill and cleanup operations? Have you entered into, or do you plan to enter into, any compensation agreements with local landowners for harm or damage caused by the latest spill? If so, please provide a copy of these agreements.”
U.S. EPA: NEWS UPDATE #5: TC Energy Pipeline Rupture and Oil Discharge Near Washington, Kansas
12/15/22
“On-scene coordinators (OSCs) and a public information officer (PIO) from EPA Region 7 continue to remain on-scene at the pipeline rupture and oil discharge near Washington, Kansas. Response crews continue to focus on cleanup and recovery operations in Mill Creek, and additional equipment – such as heated skimmers, diaphragm pumps, and additional frac tanks – are en route to the scene. Response crews are also preparing for colder weather that may impact oil recovery. A total of 414 personnel reported to the scene on Wednesday, Dec. 14. This number includes personnel from EPA, U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), state and local agencies, TC Energy, and TC Energy contractors. Response crews have recovered 233,814 gallons (5,567 barrels) of oil-water mixture from Mill Creek; 5,000 cubic yards of oil-contaminated soil; and nine cubic yards of oily solids. Response statistics also indicate that four deceased mammals have been recovered, along with 71 fish. Wildlife assessment crews are continuing their assessment observations of impacted wildlife. All deceased and impacted wildlife are being assessed by biologists with the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks (KDWP). EPA has received numerous inquiries about the nature of the oil that was discharged from the ruptured pipeline. The material discharged from the ruptured pipeline was diluted bitumen, a heavy crude oil.”
Reuters: Keystone pipeline break spilled diluted bitumen, complicating cleanup
Rod Nickel and Mrinalika Roy, 12/15/22
“The oil spilled from TC Energy Corp's (TRP.TO) ruptured Keystone pipeline was diluted bitumen, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said on Thursday, adding complications to the cleanup,” Reuters reports. “...Bitumen tends to sink in water, making it harder to collect than oils that float… “The ruptured portion that extends from south of Steele City, Nebraska, to a storage hub in Cushing, Oklahoma, remains closed. Bitumen from Canada's oil sands is a dense, thick form of oil that shippers dilute with lighter oils so it can move through pipelines. The resulting product is called dilbit for short. A 2016 National Academy of Sciences study for the U.S. Department of Transportation examined whether transporting dilbit carries different environmental risks than other oils, following a 2010 spill in Michigan. The report said that when diluted bitumen spills, a thick, dense material forms as a residue after exposure to the environment. The residue tends to stick to surfaces, sometimes sinking to the bottom of a water body. “For this reason, spills of diluted bitumen pose particular challenges when they reach water bodies,” the report said… “Cleanup of the 2010 Enbridge Inc (ENB.TO) pipeline spill lasted years because of the difficulties collecting dilbit, Keith Brooks, campaigns director at Environmental Defence, told Reuters, adding that recovery in Kansas may be no different. "I would expect it's going to be a long, long time. The Sierra Club, another environmental advocacy group, questioned why parts of the pipeline reopened before TC Energy had identified the leak's cause. "How can we be assured that other segments of the pipeline aren't equally prone to failure?" Zack Pistoria, Sierra's lobbyist in Kansas, told Reuters.”
Kansas News Service: The Kansas Keystone pipeline spill isn't an ordinary oil spill. Here's why.
Celia Llopis-Jepsen, 12/15/22
“The spill in Kansas is now the second-largest spill of tar sands crude on U.S. soil. And scientists say this stuff comes with major complications for containing and cleaning it,” Kansas News Service reports. “Each day that passes, the hundreds of thousands of gallons of sludgy oil coating Mill Creek in north-central Kansas become harder to clean up. That’s because the pipeline that busted just outside the town of Washington on Dec. 7 doesn’t carry conventional crude oil. It carries a product of the Canadian tar sands called diluted bitumen that changes dramatically in chemical composition and behavior soon after escaping from pipes. A National Academies of Sciences study found that transformation means the crude oil can start sinking below the water’s surface in a matter of days… “The Environmental Protection Agency acknowledged Thursday morning that the crude was diluted bitumen, also known as dilbit. But the agency wouldn’t respond to questions about the implications of that fact for cleaning and containing the notoriously elusive crude oil. And it wouldn’t disclose what methods were being used to verify the material is truly contained, even as Mill Creek continues to flow downstream… “When a significant fraction of the spilled crude oil” sinks below the water’s surface, the scientists concluded, “the response becomes more complex because there are few proven techniques in the responder ‘tool box’ for detection, containment, and recovery.” “...In Michigan, the gunk proved so gluey that it was easier to haul rocks away that had been coated with it along the Kalamazoo River than to scrub the bitumen off of them, Steve Hamilton, a biologist who advised the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on the cleanup, told KNS. “It’s almost impossible to clean from surfaces,” Hamilton, a professor at Michigan State University and member of the National Academies of Sciences committee that wrote the 2016 report on diluted bitumen, told KNS. “We tried hot water sprays and detergent and so on. … It’s extremely sticky once it has been exposed to air for a while.” “...It ultimately took four years to clean up the Kalamazoo River spill,” Hamilton said Wednesday, “And you could argue that three and three-quarters of those years were all about (removing) submerged oil.” “...On Tuesday, the Kansas News Service asked TC Energy which specific detection techniques the company is using to verify whether the crude oil spilled in Kansas has been entirely contained within a four-mile stretch of Mill Creek. The News Service also asked which specific cleanup techniques are being used to address the concerns of scientists that traditional crude oil cleanup approaches have limited success on diluted bitumen spills. TC Energy wouldn’t offer specifics.”
Financial Post: TC Energy restarts part of Keystone pipeline after oil spill
Meghan Potkins, 12/15/22
“TC Energy Corp. has restarted a section of the main trunk of its Keystone pipeline from Hardisty, Alta. to the U.S. Midwest, as well as a branch extending eastward to Illinois, following a large spill of crude into a Kansas creek last week,” the Financial Post reports. “...The company has not provided a timeline for a complete restart of the line, nor has it indicated what caused the failure that resulted in one of the worst onshore crude spills in the U.S. in nearly a decade… “Even prior to the latest spill, questions had been raised about a special federal U.S. permit issued to TC Energy allowing it to operate Keystone at a higher pressure than other pipelines. A U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report issued last year noted that Keystone’s permit was developed to provide for safe operations at 80 per cent specified minimum yield strength, rather than the 72 per cent maximum governing all other hazardous liquid pipelines in the U.S. Specified minimum yield strength represents the stress level at which a steel pipeline will begin to deform. The pipeline has seen three large spills in the last five years, including a 4,515-barrel spill in North Dakota in 2019 and a 6,592-barrel spill in South Dakota in 2017, according to data from the PHMSA. Some American environmental and landowner rights groups have actively campaigned to see Keystone’s special permit revoked and have pointed to the latest incident as proof that U.S. authorities should intervene. “My initial reaction was, here we go again,” Jane Kleeb, founder of the group Bold Nebraska which opposed Keystone XL and is chair of Nebraska’s Democratic Party, told the Post. “This is a pipeline that should be shut down, it has too many failures in a short amount of time to continue operating safely.”
Nebraska Examiner: Part of Keystone pipeline restarts; 2,600 barrels of oil recovered at Kansas spill
PAUL HAMMEL, 12/15/22
“An unaffected portion of the Keystone pipeline was restarted Wednesday night as crews continued recovery, repair and remediation work on a pipeline leak near Washington, Kansas,” the Nebraska Examiner reports. “...Last week, a federal pipeline agency ordered TC Energy to determine the root cause of the oil spill, review 10 years of inspections and create a remedial work plan that assesses the risk of spills at other points along the pipeline before requesting a restart of the pipeline. About 317 personnel were on the scene from EPA, TC Energy, and other state and local agencies, the EPA said on Wednesday. Jane Kleeb of the Bold Alliance, which opposes fossil fuel pipelines, told the Examiner she wants the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to conduct an examination of the integrity of the entire pipeline. Kleeb told the Examiner that Bold had raised questions about the use of substandard steel in the Keystone system back in 2010 and the total number of leaks — 25 according to Bold — on a relatively new pipeline is a concern. “There’s so many unanswered questions that we have,” she told the Examiner.
Reuters: Enbridge to increase rationing of January oil pipeline space on Mainline system
Nia Williams, 12/15/22
“Enbridge Inc ENB.TO said on Thursday apportionment on its Mainline oil pipeline system will rise in January, reaching the highest levels in over a year, following a week-long shutdown of rival TC Energy's TRP.TO Keystone pipeline,” Reuters reports. “Oil shippers will see the space they have requested to ship barrels rationed by 17% on light oil pipelines and 16% on heavy crude pipelines, Enbridge said in an email.”
The Dakota Scout: Two more counties sued over opposition to carbon pipeline
Jonathan Ellis, 12/14/22
“Two more South Dakota counties that have resisted efforts to build a carbon pipeline within their borders have been taken to court by the pipeline company,” The Dakota Scout reports. “Summit Carbon Solutions and ethanol plant owner Ronald Alverson filed suit against Spink and McPherson counties in Federal District Court on Tuesday. They join Brown and Edmunds counties as defendants. The county commissioners in those counties have also been named as defendants. Brown County, meanwhile, filed a motion to dismiss the case against it on Tuesday. All four lawsuits are currently separate cases, but they could be combined.”
E&E News: CO2 pipeline developers: Iowa can't require safety info
JEFFREY TOMICH, 12/15/22
“Companies seeking to build almost 2,000 miles of liquefied carbon dioxide pipeline across Iowa contend state regulators can’t require them to file safety assessments of the projects because the federal government has sole jurisdiction over the issue,” E&E News reports. “Attorneys for the pipeline developers — Summit Carbon Solutions LLC, Wolf Carbon Solutions US LLC and Navigator CO2 Ventures LLC — made their case before the Iowa Utilities Board on Tuesday. They’re challenging a July 14 board order requiring Summit Carbon, the first company in the state to apply for a permit to build a CO2 pipeline, to produce safety-related documents sought by the state’s consumer advocate. The Iowa case is part of a broader battle concerning jurisdiction over CO2 pipelines that’s playing out across the Upper Plains. Hundreds of landowners and numerous counties in Iowa, Illinois, the Dakotas, Nebraska and Minnesota are pushing back against pipeline proposals. Meanwhile developers are going on the offensive and have filed at least four federal lawsuits against local governments in Iowa and South Dakota challenging zoning and permitting regulations adopted in response to the projects. Pipeline companies are standing their ground in asserting that the Pipeline and Hazardous Safety Materials Administration (PHMSA), an agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation, has sole jurisdiction over safety. In Iowa, the companies’ argument was challenged by the Iowa Office of Consumer Advocate, the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation and the Sierra Club, who agreed that state regulators and other parties should have access to safety-related information in deciding if the projects are in the public interest and, if so, determining appropriate routes… “Anna Ryon, an attorney with the Iowa Office of Consumer Advocate, argued that seeking safety-related information isn’t the same as setting standards and that the board and parties in the case should have access to plume modeling, emergency response plans and other information to decide if the pipelines serve the public interest and to help in siting decisions. “What we’re asking you to do is consider reality,” Ryon said. “The reality is that pipelines leak. Pipelines rupture. The pipeline companies can do everything perfectly according to PHMSA’s regulations, have a spotless safety record, but there can still be a leak or a rupture. It happens.” “...The utilities board is also deciding on a procedural schedule for Summit Carbon’s application for a certificate to construct the pipeline. The company asked for a final order by June 23. Other parties argue that it’s premature to establish a schedule for deciding the case since PHMSA is looking to strengthen carbon dioxide pipeline safety standards.”
Iowa Capital Dispatch: Attorneys tussle over land survey provisions for pipelines
JARED STRONG, 12/15/22
“A company that wants to build a sprawling carbon dioxide pipeline in northwest Iowa should have obtained a court order before attempting to survey private land from which it had been previously barred, a Dickinson County prosecutor argued Thursday,” the Iowa Capital Dispatch reports. “At issue is a trespassing charge against Stephen James Larsen, 28, of Arlington, South Dakota, who was part of a land survey crew from Summit Carbon Solutions that attempted to evaluate farmland east of Spirit Lake in August… “State law allows pipeline companies to gain access to private land after they have held informational meetings in affected counties and have given 10 days’ notice through certified mail to landowners and tenants… “Alan Ostergren, a Des Moines attorney who is defending Larsen, said it’s unnecessary to get a court order to be protected against a criminal trespassing charge by the survey law… “Assistant County Attorney Steven Goodlow, who is prosecuting the case, argued Thursday against dismissal because the landowners and tenant refused to accept certified letters that were meant to give notice of the land survey. Court records show Summit sent five letters in March and July. The company attempted to survey the land in April and August. In April, tenant Jeff Jones told a survey crew to leave the property and never return. Goodlow argued the warning — in combination with the refusal to accept survey notices — meant Summit needed to get a court injunction to survey the land without risking a trespassing charge. “My concern for property owners — landowners — is do they have to repeatedly, basically stand guard at the gate to continue to turn away the survey crews when they told them not to come back?” Goodlow said Thursday in court, according to a recording of the hearing provided by the Dickinson County News. He continued later: “What prevents them from coming back over and over and over again, and without any recourse? They’re trying to protect the property.” District Associate Judge Shawna Ditsworth did not decide Thursday whether to dismiss the charge. She gave a deadline of next week for the defense to submit additional information and the prosecution a deadline of Jan. 12. It’s unclear when Ditsworth might rule on the dismissal request.”
Oelwein Daily Register: Zoning Commission hears concerns on CO2 pipeline
MIRA SCHMITT-CASH, 12/14/22
“At a packed public hearing of the Bremer County Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, Dec. 6, landowners, residents and local government officials voiced their concerns about a proposed liquefied carbon dioxide pipeline through Bremer County,” the Oelwein Daily Register reports. “The focus was a proposed county zoning ordinance to regulate and restrict land use for hazardous-liquid pipelines… “Others expressed concerns about damage from potential ruptures when valves are planned 20 miles apart, as PHMSA allows. Bremer County Planning and Zoning Commissioner Lindley Sharp estimated over 75 people attended the hearing at the Waverly Civic Center… “Recently, the Bremer County Board of Supervisors retained attorney Tim Whipple of Des Moines-based law firm Ahlers & Cooney to help update the comprehensive plan related to the proposed pipeline. Language in the ordinance expresses the intent of the Bremer County Board of Supervisors and Zoning Commission to comply with state and federal laws… “The county has a separate obligation, a legal obligation to make sure it has emergency personnel and first responders,” Whipple continued. “The ordinance is taking the position that in order to do that well, it needs certain information, in order to evacuate people if there would be an incident. We’re clarifying here, in that part of the ordinance, what information we need and what it’s for.” “...Keep in mind, areas we can have an impact is, future land use, economic growth, economic development of the areas, so how is this going to affect property,” Commission Chair Dove said, opening the hearing… “Supervisors Chair Dewey Hildebrandt said although worried about unintended consequences, the board wanted to be proactive. “If you don’t try, how do you succeed?” “...Attendee Kathy Boeckmann, who lives north of Waverly, said she was worried about their land and safety. “We don’t have enough EMTs to cover out in the rural areas,” she said. “Let alone a hazardous pipeline. We’re putting a brand new school here on the north side of Waverly, and it’s downwind from this pipeline. I have grandkids growing up. They’re going to make money on this. None of us are going to make money on this. Please, zoning, please get this passed and I pray that we can go to court and start a precedent and stop this,” she said, to applause.
E&E News: FERC meeting: Pipeline win, transmission and Glick’s exit
Miranda Willson, 12/16/22
“The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission voted Thursday to allow a controversial Midwest pipeline to continue operating after a court revoked its original permit, in a win for natural gas at the last meeting overseen by Chair Richard Glick,” E&E News reports. “Glick will step down from his post in the coming weeks, leaving the independent commission with four members, the Democrat said in closing the meeting. President Joe Biden nominated Glick for a second term on the commission, but his future at FERC dimmed last month when Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chair Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) indicated he would not allow the nomination to move forward… “During the meeting, FERC unanimously authorized the Spire STL pipeline in Missouri and Illinois to remain in service after reevaluating whether the project was necessary… “FERC had issued a permit for the 65-mile Spire pipeline in 2019. But last year, the U.S. Court of the Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the commission had ignored evidence that the project was not needed. The D.C. Circuit also revoked the project’s original permit, raising questions about whether it could continue to supply natural gas service to the St. Louis region. In the meantime, Spire has been accused by Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) and others of failing to properly restore private properties along the pipeline route… “Even as the commission voted to reissue a permit for the project, Glick and Commissioner Allison Clements said the agency would closely monitor Spire’s restoration process and other aspects of the project. Environmental groups have said the Spire project illustrates the alleged deficiencies in the commission’s reviews of natural gas projects, arguing that FERC must more closely scrutinize the economic need for new projects and their environmental impacts. “The Spire situation is the embodiment of why FERC needs to get its reviews of pipelines right from the start,” Gillian Giannetti, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council’s Sustainable FERC Project, told E&E. “No community — or company, for that matter — should be faced with years of uncertainty because FERC didn’t do a full analysis of the public’s interest in a pipeline plan.”
Associated Press: Contested natural gas pipeline in Illinois, Missouri granted permanent certificate
12/15/22
“Federal officials on Thursday granted Spire Inc. a permanent certificate to operate a natural gas pipeline in Missouri and Illinois, angering the environmental group that had sued over the project,” the Associated Press reports. “The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission first granted approval for the Spire STL Pipeline in 2018 and it became fully operational in 2019. It connects with another pipeline in western Illinois and carries natural gas to the St. Louis region, where Spire serves around 650,000 customers. But the Environmental Defense Fund sued in 2020, raising concerns that the pipeline was approved without adequate review. Last year, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that FERC had not adequately demonstrated a need for the project, vacating approval of the pipeline… “But Ted Kelly, an Environmental Defense Fund attorney, disagreed, telling AP that FERC had "again failed to fulfill its obligation," alleging that some landowners, ratepayers and stakeholders were shut out of the review. He told AP that FERC should reverse its decision to grant the permanent certificate and reopen the process with a temporary certificate in place so there is no disruption in service.”
Reuters: U.S. energy regulator approves Energy Transfer's Louisiana gas pipeline
12/15/22
“Pipeline operator Energy Transfer LP (ET.N) on Thursday received approval to start operations on a natural gas pipeline that will deliver fuel to the U.S. Gulf Coast at a time of supercharged demand overseas,” Reuters reports. “The Gulf Run pipeline, which can carry 1.65 billion cubic feet per day, takes natural gas from other Energy Transfer pipelines that link to shale gas basins in Texas, Louisiana and Arkansas. The 135-mile pipeline runs from Westdale to Starks, Louisiana. Natural gas projects are expected to be move ahead in coming years as production rises and shippers secure new customers in Europe, which is trying to wean itself off Russian energy, and in Asia, where many countries are boosting imports of LNG.”
Prairie Public Broadcasting: Pipeline company fined $50,000 for not following its approved corridor
Dave Thompson, 12/15/22
“A natural gas pipeline company has been fined $50,000 by the North Dakota Public Service Commission – for violations of the state’s siting law,” Prairie Public Broadcasting reports. “Andeavor Field Services LLC has 8-inch and 6-inch diameter natural gas pipelines in McKenzie, Billings and Stark Counties. The pipelines were built in 2018. But PSC Chairman Julie Fedorchak said Commission staff issued a Notice of Non-Compliance in 2020, after the company failed to provide required documentation of the work it had done. A supplemental Notice of Non Compliance was issued later that year. Fedorchak told PPB there were several problems – including the company building outside the pipeline corridor. She told PPB the company did have a permit. "But then they pretty much built it without a lot of concern for what the permit requirements said," Fedorchak told PPB. "Then they filed the 'as built' documents after being bugged by the Commission twice, two years after the construction." Fedorchak told PPB that's when PSC staff realized the company went outside the corridor for significant distances, on multiple occasions. She told PPB in a few cases, the pipeline was built more than a mile outside the corridor. Fedorchak told PPB staff negotiated a “consent agreement,” under which Andeavor agreed to a $50,000 fine. Fedorchak told PPB that’s the second biggest fine for siting violations the Commission has issued. And she told PPB it sends a message to companies – get a permit, and stick to it.”
WASHINGTON UPDATES
The Hill: Senate rejects Manchin’s energy permitting amendment to defense bill
RACHEL FRAZIN, 12/15/22
“The Senate has bucked Sen. Joe Manchin’s (D-W.Va.) latest effort to get his energy deal with Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) attached to must-pass legislation,” The Hill reports. “The chamber blocked Manchin’s permitting reform amendment from getting onto a defense funding bill known as the National Defense Authorization Act in an 47-47 vote. Sixty votes were needed to advance the measure… “The vote did not exactly fall along party lines. Republican Sens. Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.), Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Rob Portman (Ohio), Mitt Romney (Utah), Dan Sullivan (Alaska) and Pat Toomey (Pa.) voted in favor of the bill. Meanwhile Democratic Sens. Cory Booker (N.J.), Tammy Duckworth (Ill.), Tim Kaine (Va.), Ed Markey (Mass.), Bob Menendez (N.J.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.), Debbie Stabenow (Mich.), Rafael Warnock (D-Ga.) and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), as well as liberal Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) voted against it… “The measure was widely expected to fail on Thursday, but the vote provides Manchin a headcount, as he is expected to continue pushing for a compromise deal next year. It also put many Republicans on the record as opposing legislation that would be expected to bolster the energy industry. Manchin, in a statement following the vote, slammed his Republican colleagues who voted against the measure, saying they put politics ahead of the country. “Once again, [Senate Minority Leader] Mitch McConnell [(R-Ky.)] and Republican leadership have put their own political agenda above the needs of the American people,” he said… “President Biden issued a statement Thursday morning, hours before the vote, throwing his support behind Manchin’s proposal, pitching it as a continuation of Democrats’ efforts to lower costs through the Inflation Reduction Act enacted this fall… “Progressive Democrats have raised objections to provisions that they fear will limit community involvement in assessing the potentially harmful impacts of a future energy project as well as those that would advance fossil fuel infrastructure… “Capito, a supporter of Manchin’s effort, said ahead of the vote that she hopes that lawmakers will revisit the issue “after the first of the year.”
E&E News: End of the line for permitting bill, but 2023 fight looms
Nick Sobczyk, 12/16/22
“The Senate on Thursday rejected a permitting amendment to the fiscal 2023 National Defense Authorization Act. U.S. Senate,” E&E News reports. “Sen. Joe Manchin’s attempt to overhaul environmental rules for energy projects failed in the Senate on Thursday, ending a monthslong effort from the West Virginia Democrat… “The vote underscored disagreements between Democrats and Republicans about how the federal government should handle the major electric transmission projects that will be needed to add scores of new wind and solar projects to the grid. It could be a defining political issue for the energy transition over the next several years. The failed vote, however, sets up a potential permitting fight in a divided Congress next year that could shape the future of the nation’s power mix. “It’s crucial for the emissions reductions that the [Inflation Reduction Act] bill claims to produce,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) told E&E… “Among the Democrats who voted “no” on the permitting amendment were Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)... “House progressives rallied to help kill Manchin’s earlier efforts to attach the measure to must-pass bills. They opposed provisions that would help expedite judicial reviews for energy project permits, ease the path for fossil fuels and authorize the Mountain Valley pipeline. The vote Thursday evening was celebrated by environmental groups… “Still, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle said they see a path to a bipartisan bill. “I think everyone realizes that there could be improvements made to the permitting process,” Merkley, a vocal opponent of Manchin’s bill, told E&E. “So hopefully we’ll have a regular order discussion in a committee about how to do so in a way that facilitates the transition to renewables.” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), a former state utility commissioner, acknowledged that making major changes to NEPA would be a “non-starter” for Democrats.”
Common Dreams: Climate Defenders Celebrate as Senate Rejects Manchin's Dirty Deal
JESSICA CORBETT, 12/16/22
“The U.S. climate movement and people on the frontlines of the planetary crisis celebrated Thursday after the U.S. Senate declined to add Sen. Joe Manchin's fossil fuel-friendly permitting bill to a military spending package,” Common Dreams reports. “While the $858 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) ultimately passed, the West Virginia Democrat's amendment fell short of the 60 votes needed to include his Building American Energy Security Act of 2022. The 47-47 vote Thursday evening came after two previous defeats: The bill was left out of the NDAA draft last week; and in September, Manchin asked Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)—who agreed to push through permitting reforms if Manchin voted for the Inflation Reduction Act—to remove a previous version from stopgap funding legislation… "The people have triumphed over the polluters once again," said People vs. Fossil Fuels, a national coalition of over 1,200 organizations. "Sen. Manchin's dirty deal was a direct assault on frontline communities and the environmental laws that protect our air, water, climate, and public health."
Press release: Statement from President Joe Biden on Senator Joe Manchin’s Permitting Reform Proposal
12/15/22
“Earlier this year, the Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act to help bring down every day costs – including costs for energy. Already we are seeing inflation come down, and that is a step in the right direction. But the work is far from done. I support Senator Manchin’s permitting reform proposal as a way to cut Americans’ energy bills, promote US energy security, and boost our ability to get energy projects built and connected to the grid. Today, far too many projects face delays — keeping us from generating critical, cost-saving energy needed by families and businesses across America. That’s an impediment to our economic growth, for creating new jobs, and for lessening our reliance on foreign imports. Senator Manchin’s legislation is an important step toward unlocking the potential of these new energy projects to cut consumer costs and spur good-paying jobs. It is critical to improve the permitting process so we can produce and deliver energy to consumers in all parts of the country. The Congress promised the American people a more reliable, affordable, sustainable, “made in the USA” energy future when it passed the Inflation Reduction Act. Congress can help keep that promise and advance our energy future by passing Senator Manchin‘s permitting reform legislation.”
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners: NARUC Letter Opposes New Transmission Permitting Proposal: Infringes on State Authority
12/13/22
“In response to the “Building American Energy Security Act of 2022” released on December 7, 2022, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners sent a letter to Senator Joe Manchin expressing strong opposition to the legislation’s broad overreach and infringement on existing state siting authority and cost allocation authority for electric transmission projects. As the letter notes, the proposal would give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission carte blanche jurisdiction over electric transmission siting without respect to local circumstances or needs, which negates the principles of federalism outlined in the U.S. Constitution and does not address the real issue, which is federal permitting. “We are actively engaging with FERC on this issue,” said NARUC President Michael Caron. “The Federal-State Task Force on Electric Transmission is a prime example of how cooperative federalism works. I would urge Senator Manchin and any other members of Congress to attend a NARUC meeting or a Task Force meeting to better understand how states and federal agencies can work well together to identify problems and work toward finding solutions.” NARUC has offered to participate in drafting streamlined permitting legislation that takes into account the very real and significant issues that affect the states themselves, the regions and the myriad policy directions the different states are pursuing.”
Bloomberg: Manchin spurs US reversal on carbon capture funding in win for Big Oil
Kevin Crowley and Ari Natter, 12/14/22
“The Biden administration has reversed course on a carbon capture funding program to allow oil production following an intervention by senators including Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, handing a win to the fossil fuel industry,” Bloomberg reports. “The Department of Energy on Tuesday announced $3.7 billion of funding to back projects that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, which have long been considered key technologies needed to reach net-zero goals. But in a policy pivot, the programs now open the door to the use of taxpayer dollars to fund carbon capture projects that produce fossil fuels through a process known as enhanced oil recovery, or EOR. It’s a significant shift and one likely to be championed by the oil and gas industry because it promises more funding options for crude production. The move is also another example of how the Biden administration has been caught between competing interests as it pushes a climate agenda while trying to increase energy supplies in order to tame gasoline prices… “Critics argue that the crude produced through EOR negates any climate benefit and helps prolong the long-term use of fossil fuels… “Earlier this year, the Department of Energy notified the industry of its intent to provide funding for DAC projects, but specifically said that projects that produce oil and gas ‘’will not be accepted.’’ The department decided to change that stance after a July letter in which Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat; Sinema, an Arizona Independent; and other lawmakers from both sides of the aisle said they were concerned it wouldn’t be implemented as Congress intended, according to a person familiar with the matter. Project developers ‘’should not be subject to requirements that would limit the revenue’' derived from pumping CO2 underground, 10 senators wrote in the letter. Widening the revenue streams would ‘’provide the flexibility that private developers need to gain value from investment in DAC, including to deploy first-of-its-kind technology at scale.’’ “...For environmentalists, subsidizing oil and gas production is a fundamental strategic flaw in the policy. ‘’The fossil fuel industry’s access to climate policy making is what has delayed and constrained action up to this point,’’ John Noel, a senior campaigner with Greenpeace USA, told Bloomberg. ‘’Giving oil producers access to a consistent and subsidized source of carbon dioxide that they can plow into the ground to keep oil oilfields alive is a recipe for disaster, and keeps us further away from the Biden administration’s emissions goals.’’
E&E News: DOE releases record funding for removing carbon
Corbin Hiar, Carlos Anchondo, 12/14/22
“A high-stakes race that will shape the future of direct air capture technology has officially begun,” E&E News reports. “The Department of Energy fired the starting gun Tuesday with the release of guidelines the agency will follow when awarding $3.5 billion for four regional hubs that aim to rapidly scale up systems for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. That prize money, which comes from the bipartisan infrastructure law of 2021, will be distributed over the next five years in two prize competitions. The infusion of cash comes as the direct air capture industry, or DAC, is still in its infancy. There are only 18 operating facilities worldwide that use fans, filters and pipes to suck carbon out of the air and pump it underground, where it’s supposed to be stored indefinitely. They are collectively capable of capturing less than 10,000 metric tons of CO2 per year, according to an April report from the International Energy Agency… “But some were disappointed by changes the agency made to prevent promising techniques for catching carbon, such as ocean capture, from receiving funding. Other techniques that were made ineligible include biochar, biomass burial, soil carbon sequestration and afforestation… “In another change, DOE reversed a decision from earlier this year that would’ve barred future hubs from receiving money when using entrapped CO2 for enhanced oil recovery. DOE initially said that was “not of interest and will not be accepted.” But Tuesday’s announcement included instructions for proposals that include fossil fuel production… “Some environmentalists argued that government-funded DAC projects should not be connected to oil production. “To allow the oil companies to participate in this government-supported enterprise is stunning and disorienting when we’re listening to Biden and DOE officials talk about their climate goals,” John Noël, a senior climate campaigner with Greenpeace USA, told E&E.”
EXTRACTION
E&E News: High Gas Prices Make Methane Capture Profitable, Report Says
Camille Bond, 12/15/22
“The oil and gas industry could profitably capture and sell enough methane to replace 60 percent of the natural gas Europe once imported from Russia, according to a new analysis from S&P Global Commodity Insights,” E&E News reports. “The analysis finds that today’s high natural gas prices could make it profitable for the industry to capture 80 billion cubic meters of methane that it would otherwise emit into the atmosphere. That could unlock a new supply of natural gas and lower the emissions of methane, which traps roughly 80 times as much heat as carbon dioxide over its 20-year lifespan. ‘The idea here is that we can actually solve an energy security problem and a climate problem in a single shot,’ Matt Watson, vice president of the energy transition team at the Environmental Defense Fund, which commissioned the analysis, told E&E. But, he added, ‘the fundamental solution here is an accelerated transition to cleaner, more stable energy sources that aren’t subject to these kinds of disruptions.”
Down to Earth: Why did methane emissions spike in 2020? Study offers answers
Rohini Krishnamurthy, 12/15/22
“Low nitrogen oxide pollution and warming wetlands likely drove global methane emissions to record high levels in 2020, according to a new study,” Down to Earth reports. “Global methane emissions reached roughly 15 parts per billion (ppb) in 2020 from 9.9 ppb in 2019, the study published in the journal Nature noted. This increase occurred despite the COVID-19 lockdown, which brought the world to a standstill. In 2020, methane emissions from human activities decreased by 1.2 teragrams (Tg) per year, the study showed. “The study helps unravel a puzzle concerning why globally methane increased when many other greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide decreased during 2020,” Vinayak Sinha, associate professor at the Indian Institute of Science Education and Research, Mohali, told Down To Earth. He was not involved in the study… “The results have significant implications for our ability to reliably predict methane changes in a future world with lower anthropogenic emissions of pollutants like nitrogen oxides and also if we have a wetter world,” Sinha told Down to Earth..
Reuters: Canada's Greenfire Resources to list in U.S. via $780 million SPAC deal
12/15/22
“Canada's Greenfire Resources Inc plans to list in the United States by merging with blank-check firm M3-Brigade Acquisition III Corp (MBSC.N) in a deal that values the combined company at $780 million, they said on Thursday,” Reuters reports. “Greenfire plans to become the parent company after the deal closes in the second half of next year, with the energy firm's shareholders owning nearly 81% of the combined company. The low-cost oil sands producer explores, acquires, develops and produces oil and gas in Canada. The transaction values it at $950 million, including debt. Greenfire joins several other energy companies in pushing ahead with listing plans at a time when the broader SPAC market has been on a downtrend… “A SPAC, also known as a blank-check firm, raises money in an IPO for the purpose of merging with a private company and taking it public.”
CLIMATE FINANCE
E&E News: Europe's Biggest Bank Won't Back New Oil And Gas
12/14/22
“Europe’s biggest bank just took a major step away from the fossil fuel industry in a move that raises the bar for U.S. banks under intensifying pressure to do the same,” E&E News reports. “London-based HSBC Holdings PLC announced Wednesday that it would no longer provide financing for new oil and gas field projects or related infrastructure. The news came via an update to the lending giant’s climate policy. It emphasized that while HSBC will continue to finance existing oil and gas production, the firm acknowledges that new oil and gas fields are not compatible with the clean energy transition — and may consider cutting ties with companies who don’t act accordingly.”
Quartz: Ending finance for new oil and gas drilling projects is the minimum banks should do
Tim McDonnell, 12/16/22
“London-based bank HSBC will immediately stop lending and underwriting for new oil and gas drilling projects, the bank announced Dec. 14, making it the first large multinational bank—and top-tier funder of fossil fuels—to adopt such a policy,” Quartz reports. “The policy change follows a year of pressure from activist shareholders, and raises the bar for other major banks that have set long-term goals to decarbonize their lending but have so far been reluctant to close the purse strings for oil and gas producers. “HSBC’s announcement is groundbreaking and will send shockwaves to governments and fossil fuel giants,” Jeanne Martin, head of the banking program at ShareAction, an advocacy group that spearheaded climate-related shareholder resolutions at HSBC and worked with the bank on its new oil and gas policy, told Quartz… “There’s still plenty HSBC can do to improve on its climate policies, Martin told Quartz. In October, UK officials banned some of the bank’s ads for making claims that were misleading or greenwashing. And although HSBC has said it will require its corporate clients to deliver net-zero transition plans, it hasn’t said how it will assess those plans or whether it would sever ties with clients whose plans are inadequate. Still, if HSBC can at least target project finance, there’s no reason why JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citi, and other major fossil fuel financiers can’t follow suit. And the more expensive and elusive finance for drilling becomes, the more pressure oil and gas companies will feel to speed up their shift to lower-carbon business models. “The fact that HSBC could make this commitment makes it very hard for other banks to not make similar commitments,” Martin told Quartz.
TODAY IN GREENWASHING
Enbridge: A Responsible Approach To Benefit Natural Gas Consumers
12/15/22
“There's a new acronym to take stock of in the vernacular of Enbridge Gas,” according to Enbridge. “We've all come to know RNG, or renewable natural gas, very well in the past year or two as we embarked on a number of key initiatives to help manufacture and distribute the clean biogas generated from decomposing organic waste. Now with help from the United States' largest natural gas producer, EQT Corporation (EQT), we're preparing to introduce our valued customers in Ontario to RSG, or responsibility sourced gas. We hope everyone will soon recognize that Enbridge's RSG is A-OK, especially from an Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) standpoint. At Enbridge, we believe the most cost-effective, dependable and resilient approach to net-zero is a diversified pathway. As part of our overall commitment to a sustainable future, Enbridge Gas has entered into a partnership with EQT to purchase 15 PJ (petajoules) of RSG, beginning in November 2022, and running through October 2023. That's approximately 3% of Enbridge Gas' annual gas purchases, a move that strengthens the company's commitment to climate action-and does so without adding to end-user costs… “While the natural gas currently purchased by Enbridge Gas meets strict industry-wide criteria for quality, RSG exceeds the current standards to ensure sustainability across the entire value chain. It typically undergoes independent, third-party certification where the natural gas is produced under specified best practices that aim to minimize environmental and community impacts. EQT has currently certified 66% of its natural gas under both the EO100™ Standard for Responsible Energy Development, which focuses on ESG performance, and the MiQ methane standard. The RSG from EQT will be blended into the Enbridge pool for all customers, and Enbridge will also use RSG to fuel some of its own operations.”
OPINION
The Alpena News: We must enforce pipeline safety
GREG AWTRY, 12/16/22
“TC Energy, formerly known as TransCanada, has yet another large pipeline spill,” Greg Awtry writes for The Alpena News. “...For me, it all began in 2009 and 2010 in York, Nebraska, where I was publisher of their local paper, the York News-Times… “Soon after that, TransCanada visited our newspaper office — their first of many, many visits to follow. They told us it would create 20,000 construction jobs and an additional 118,000 indirect jobs, and the millions it would pay in local property taxes for the first 15 years. Well, those numbers sounded enormous to me, so the York News-Times began what turned out be a years-long effort to find out the real facts, and it turned out TransCanada was being let’s just say not exactly truthful with many of their claims… “So, as we learned more about the Keystone XL, it became obvious that the risks of that pipeline far outweighed the benefits. So I, along with many Nebraskans, began to fight the project. There were a lot of reasons, but none more important to me than that the KXL, full of that benzene-laced tar sand, would have crossed over 200 miles of the Ogallala Aquifer, which supplies drinking and irrigation water to people in eight states. OK, I know many of you will think fighting the KXL was stupid, especially now, when gasoline prices are so high. I hear constantly that we shouldn’t have canceled the KXL because we sure could use that oil now. Well, folks, that, too, is not the whole truth. The truth is that most of that toxic slurry was headed to the world market. It was to be refined in Port Arthur, then exported. China had invested over $30 billion into the Canadian tar sands. The pipeline in Nebraska would be four feet underground — directly above, or, in some cases, directly in the Ogallala Aquifer, and a spill would be catastrophic. The number of jobs created by the KXL after completion would be 35. Fifteen would be in Nebraska … yes, only 15… “Why would we allow a foreign corporation to use eminent domain to take control of a farmer’s or rancher’s land just to increase profits to their shareholders? The easement proposed by TransCanada lasted forever — yes, forever. If you could have seen what I saw at State Department hearings — landowners, many of whom had the land in their families for generations, passionately testified that that should never be allowed, that they are the best stewards of the land and it is up to them to protect it for generations to come. Many were brought to tears as they testified, and it became clear that the KXL project was doomed. Ten years later, TransCanada pulled the plug on the project. And now yet another spill. It seems TC Energy and Enbridge have a difficult time keeping oil in the pipes. Nebraska was right in stopping the Keystone XL. From day one, they claimed it to be “all risk, no reward,” and they were right. If we are going to continue pumping oil thousands of miles through pipelines, then the government must greatly enhance their oversight and safety measures, insisting on better monitoring, maintenance, enforcement, and compliance from the oil transporters.”
New York Times: Big Oil Companies Are Bullies Who ‘Want to Be Seen as Good Guys’
David Wallace-Wells, 12/15/22
“Last week, a House investigation into Big Oil profiteering and greenwashing released its latest report — the result of more than a year of research, subpoenas and hearings. Among other things, the latest report makes unmistakably clear that whatever Chevron, BP, Shell, Exxon and other members of the American Petroleum Institute may say about their climate policies, their investments show that they intend to continue producing and selling oil and gas deep into the future — and well beyond the carbon budgets implied by any of the world’s climate goals,” David Wallace-Wells writes for the New York Times. “...On Dec. 12, I spoke to the subcommittee chair Rep. Ro Khanna of California about the continuing intransigence of Big Oil, what tools could be used to bring those companies to account and the landscape for climate action after the Inflation Reduction Act… “The first thing that surprised me is how the culture of big oil companies has not really changed. Yes, they now acknowledge that burning fossil fuels causes climate change — they had not done that for decades. But they still are insistent on defending every past statement that their company officials made. I was really struck by the lack of introspection, the lack of even a willingness to say sorry for past mistakes. I was also struck by the bullying, the vitriol against climate activists and climate reporters — most strikingly against the Sunrise Movement kids. You have documents in which they are wishing the activists get bedbugs as they’re traveling and against Hiroko Tabuchi, the Times reporter, because of her coverage. You have these executives reaching out to The Times to try to intimidate her and going after tweets of hers. These are just two examples where you see this pervasive bunker mentality — hunker down and fight the external world that cares about climate… “Now these companies are positioning themselves as clean companies, they’re doing it in a very shrewd way, saying: “We’re going to do things about our operations.” But the documents show that they basically have a plan that this is going to give them, as they put it, a license to operate. In other words, they clean up emissions from the production of oil without accounting for emissions from the consumption of oil and use that as a sort of cover. They basically say, “if we chip around at some things that make us clean, we can actually increase production of the stuff that really matters and increase carbon.” It’s a hard story to pierce.”
RBN Energy: Ghosts Of Pipelines Past And Future - Beleaguered Appalachian Gas Pipelines Would Reduce Emissions
Amber McCullagh, 12/15/22
“Natural gas pipeline project permitting sits at the nexus of the debate about the best path toward decarbonization. Industry proponents rightly point out that pipelines can reduce aggregate emissions by displacing much higher burner-tip emissions from coal in power generation. Environmental opposition, though, highlights that a high rate of methane emissions along the gas value chain could undermine those potential improvements. In today’s RBN blog, we consider the net decarbonization impact of new gas pipelines, including the importance of quantifying upstream methane emissions, by looking at a couple of canceled or long-delayed pipeline projects that could make a big difference,” Amber McCullagh writes for RBN Energy. “Over the last six years, developers have canceled five major projects proposed to take Appalachian gas to premium markets on the East Coast… “Pipeline development grinding to a halt has restricted Appalachian gas production growth. In this blog, we’ll consider a “what-if” scenario — what would happen if either of the two largest beleaguered Appalachian takeaway pipelines, both targeting Southeast markets, were to get built? (Mountain Valley and Atlantic Coast Pipeline Projects).. “So what would a new pipeline to the Southeast displace? On the coldest winter days, the highest value is in displacing oil (blue bars in Figure 3 above) and imported LNG (red bars) — but that’s limited only to the coldest days, and small volumes. If we model a new 1.5 Bcf/d pipeline, we estimate it would displace ~800 MMcfe/d of coal currently being burned (gray bars)... “The fall permitting reform bill designated MVP as “critical energy infrastructure,” qualifying it for expedited permitting. This bill would have delivered major environmental benefits on the basis of natural gas pipelines alone. And, like Scrooge re-evaluating the wisdom of his life choices, ACP could be revived in the right macro environment, and may deserve an analogous designation as “critical.” However, these figures are predicated on that 1.4% methane-emissions rate, and until the industry embraces more sophisticated and transparent emissions measurements that provide more specificity and certainty regarding emissions levels, it will continue to struggle to rebut some of this oppositional research, and therefore will be challenged to garner the public and political support to reform gas pipeline permitting and develop critical, emissions-reducing infrastructure.”
Food & Water Watch: How Much of This Hype for Hydrogen “Energy” is Just Smoke and Mirrors?
12/13/22
“The recent outpouring of attention and funds for hydrogen just distracts from renewables, while doubling down on pollution,” writes for Food & Water Watch. “Industry advocates and policymakers worldwide have heralded hydrogen energy as the “fuel of the future.” But, when you clear away the industry smoke screen, there are many reasons to be skeptical. At closer look, it’s hard to see the hydrogen hype as anything other than a greenwashing effort from fossil fuel interests and Big Ag. So-called hydrogen energy isn’t an energy source, but rather an energy-user. Hydrogen “energy” is inherently inefficient, expensive, and emissions-intensive. This hype will cost taxpayers and ratepayers billions of dollars, with few — if any — climate benefits to show for it. Proponents claim that hydrogen is a greenhouse gas-free energy source. However, this ignores the climate impacts of hydrogen production, transportation, and use. Even so-called green hydrogen, produced with renewables, can divert renewable energy that could otherwise displace fossil fuels. At the same time, 95% of hydrogen we use today comes from fracked methane… “Though boosters call it the “fuel of the future,” we only use a bit of the hydrogen we produce for energy. The rest goes to a variety of industrial processes, like steel-making and ammonia production for fertilizers. In the U.S., almost 70% of hydrogen produced here goes to oil refining… “No matter the color, hydrogen is full of problems. It greenwashes and entrenches harmful industries like oil refining, fracking, and unsustainable fertilizer. And while there could be a few niche uses for hydrogen energy, there’s no reason to use it in, say, cars and home heating — other than corporate profits. As the hydrogen hype grows, we need to stay wary of industry claims. Before making any investments in hydrogen or issuing permits, governments must evaluate the full impact of hydrogen. That includes comparing it to the tools we already have to transition away from fossil fuels, including electrification, energy efficiency, and clean renewable energy.”
The Hill: It’s time for climate change to reach the International Court of Justice
Douglas A. Kysar is Joseph M. Field ’55 Professor of Law at Yale University and faculty co-director of the Law, Ethics, and Animals Program at Yale Law School, 12/14/22
“For several decades, powerful governments and corporations have possessed detailed knowledge regarding the catastrophic risks posed by human-caused climate change. Yet, during those same decades, many holders of public and private power have aggressively resisted efforts to steer human technologies and activities to a less destructive, more sustainable path. Instead, they have doubled down on practices they knew would endanger the very ability of the atmosphere to support stable human existence,” Douglas A. Kysar writes for The Hill. “...In 2019, a coalition of law students from the University of the South Pacific took that anger and concern and channeled it into an inspiring and urgent campaign — an initiative to bring the issue of climate justice to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Under United Nations procedures, a majority of member states in the General Assembly can request an advisory opinion from the ICJ, essentially calling on that tribunal to clarify states’ rights and responsibilities on matters of international significance. An advisory opinion from the ICJ could make clear that nations whose emissions of greenhouse gases contribute to serious harm in other countries have a duty under international law to cease or alter their harmful activities… “Any advisory opinion released by the ICJ will be non-binding — at most, it will begin a lengthy process whereby reducing the threat of climate change and addressing its impacts come to be seen as governed by international rule of law. Whether or not climate damages liability becomes part of that body of law, such a transformation is essential for climate progress to be achieved… “The world cannot endure more of the same. The time has come for the ICJ to join the cause of climate justice.”