EXTRACTED: Daily News Clips 12/6/24
PIPELINE NEWS
Drilled: Unrest in Carbon Country
KWQC: Quad Citians claim victory over pipeline company
Bloomberg: Oil Patch in Canada Has $24 Billion Shield Against Trump Tariffs
Energy Intelligence Group: Tariffs Could Wreak Havoc on North American Oil Flows
North Dakota Monitor: Judge OKs North Dakota request to intervene in Dakota Access pipeline lawsuit
Reuters: BP seeks buyers for US natural gas pipeline system stake, sources say
Spectrum News: In letter, N.Y. House Republicans urge Hochul to reconsider opposition to Northern Access Pipeline
Iowa Capital Dispatch: Natural gas company sues Iowa farmer over alleged easement violations
Daily Energy Insider: Edgewater Midstream finalizes acquisition of Sinco pipeline system from Shell
WASHINGTON UPDATES
InsideEPA: Time Running Short To Clinch Lame-Duck Permitting Deal, Backers Warn
E&E News: Musk, on Capitol Hill, says ‘get rid of all credits’
InsideEPA: Judge Weighs Legality Of Phase 2 NEPA Rule After Landmark CEQ Ruling
E&E News: The ESA Is About To Board The Trump Roller Coaster
Energy News Network: Advocates frustrated by lack of transparency, engagement on regional hydrogen hub projects
STATE UPDATES
Washington Post: N.C. town accuses utility giant of deceiving the public on climate change
Inside Climate News: It’s Do or Die Time for Philly Hydrogen Hub, and Some Green Groups Are Rooting for Death
The Sum & Substance: Business leaders deflated by preliminary state rules on carbon management
Politico: A Christmas gift for California oil refiners
Associated Press: North Dakota Governor Charts His Path To Interior With A Rosy State Oil And Gas Outlook
Capital and Main: In New Mexico, Democrats Strike an Oil and Gas Gusher: ‘Money Buys Access’
KCAL: $71 million settlement reached over Aliso Canyon, the largest methane gas leak in U.S. history
EXTRACTION
Canadian Press: Alberta minister wants to see $100B in data centre infrastructure in next five years
Canadian Occupational Safety: Regulator accused of selling out safety over Imperial Oil spill fine
Press release: Regulator sells out community safety for pennies on the dollar, as Imperial Oil gets 95 per cent “discount” on oil sands spill fine
TODAY IN GREENWASHING
PTBO Canada: Enbridge Gas Invests In Selwyn Fire Department to Support Firefighter Training
OPINION
CleanTechnica: Carbon Capture And Sequestration — The Dream That Won’t Die
Counter Punch: Is Carbon Capture Also a Hoax?
Corpus Christi Caller Times: Growth of carbon capture and storage will bring jobs to the Coastal Bend
Anchorage Daily News: Building a gas pipeline for energy and economic security
PIPELINE NEWS
Drilled: Unrest in Carbon Country
Molly Taft, 12/5/24
“One night in 2021, a farmer Steve Kenkel has known since childhood gave him a call. The farmer had news: there was going to be a CO2 pipeline coming through his property in Shelby County, Iowa,” Drilled reports. “...That phone call from a childhood friend would propel Kenkel into years of unexpected activism, and put his name on a lawsuit filed by a company founded by one of the most powerful men in Iowa. Summit Carbon Solutions is proposing to take advantage of tax credits, juiced up by the Biden administration to fight climate change as part of the Inflation Reduction Act, to pipe carbon dioxide from ethanol plants across the Midwest to be stored underground in North Dakota. Some of the men behind the project have close ties with powers in statehouses across the Midwest, and have seemed to some to be using those ties to seize land and push through a project that many people don’t want… “The Summit pipeline is a curious Frankenstein monster of big-climate-tech promises, oil industry advocacy, government tax credits, and powerful agricultural interests. The project has united landowners across five states and all along the political spectrum in opposition, from those who volunteer with the Sierra Club for climate action to those who believe the “radical environmental movement” threatens American lifestyles… “The longer we use fossil fuels, the less time we actually have to do something that respects the rights of future generations to inherit a habitable planet,” Iowa resident Carolyn Raffensperger, a lawyer and the executive director of the Science and Environmental Health Network, told Drilled. “When I think about carbon capture and storage—which is one of the most expensive [solutions], is funded by the public, and pays the polluter—it is actually delaying meaningful action.”
KWQC: Quad Citians claim victory over pipeline company
Matt Christensen, 12/5/24
“Opponents of a proposed pipeline through the Quad-Cities area are celebrating this week after the company behind the project withdrew its plans,” KWQC reports. “The Wolf Pipeline would have carried carbon dioxide emissions from ethanol plants in Cedar Rapids and Clinton to a mile-deep well in Decatur, Illinois. Amy Nelson was one of the landowners here who is part of the grassroots effort to stop the pipeline. “Some of these folks had small acreages, some were retired, some there were widows and small children,” she told KWQC. “You’ve got schools, you’ve got all kinds of different people that are involved because of proximity. And I think that the overall answer is happiness and relief that we were able to work together, use our voices and that our no as a property owner still meant no, we do not want this on our property, and we’re going to stand strong behind that.” The Quad City opponents to the pipeline were concerned about two things. One of them was property rights. And the other thing was the location of the pipeline, which was supposed to run close to schools and neighborhoods. “Most importantly for our greater community,” Nelson told KWQC, “this was a different type of pipeline or project that was highly pressurized – highly unregulated is probably the best word – even the federal government has not come out with the full regulations on this and it seemed rather a dangerous thing.” Opponents called it a victory for regular folks fighting a corporation. “It could be a story of the little guy over the big guy,” Nelson told KWQC. “In some respects, it’s a story of the community working together as a whole and really saying what does our community need?”
Bloomberg: Oil Patch in Canada Has $24 Billion Shield Against Trump Tariffs
Robert Tuttle, 12/5/24
“The expansion of Canada’s Trans Mountain pipeline represented a $24 billion bid to help the country’s oil producers reduce their near-total reliance on the US market. That’s a bet that may pay off sooner than expected if President-elect Donald Trump follows through on his tariff threats,” Bloomberg reports. “...The government-owned project could become an even more critical relief valve for Canada’s oil patch if Trump imposes 25% tariffs on imports from the country, raising the cost of the nation’s crude for US refiners. That would help protect a critical economic lifeline for Canada, whose energy products have accounted for about a third of its exports to the US in recent years. The marine terminal at the end of Trans Mountain could help ship as many as 630,000 barrels of oil a day — roughly 16% of Canada’s total oil exports — directly to Asia or elsewhere, avoiding tariffs. “They will be scrambling to find tankers,” Susan Bell, a Rystad Energy analyst, told Bloomberg. “They are going to try their hardest to fill that pipeline up.” Trump pledged to impose tariffs on Mexico and Canada on his first day in office unless they curb the flow of fentanyl and migrants into the US. While oil and gas were excluded from tariffs in his first administration, his post threatening the tariffs said they’d apply to “ALL products.” Trans Mountain currently has spare capacity because cost overruns — which more than quadrupled the line’s price tag to C$34 billion ($24 billion) — have boosted tolls and made spot shipments uneconomical. The government-owned corporation that runs the system has forecast the line won’t fill up before 2028, but tariffs would change the economics almost immediately, Bell told Bloomberg… “Still, Trans Mountain won’t make tariffs painless. Canadian heavy oil prices could drop below $40 a barrel in 2026, Goldman Sachs said in a recent note, down from about $55 currently. The pain would also be felt in the US. Midwestern refineries rely heavily on Canadian crude and have limited access to oil from other locations. Those refiners could pay at least part of the tariff themselves, Bell told Bloomberg. But a tariff could raise gasoline prices in the region by 50 cents a gallon during summer’s peak driving season, Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, said last month.”
Energy Intelligence Group: Tariffs Could Wreak Havoc on North American Oil Flows
Frans Koster, John van Schaik, 12/5/24
“US President-elect Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs on Mexico and Canada, if implemented and applied to petroleum, could disrupt structural flows of crude and refined products throughout North America, threatening energy security and higher prices for consumers,” Energy Intelligence Group reports. “The potential volumes involved are staggering — Canada ships some 4 million barrels per day of crude to the US, accounting for roughly 25% of US refinery throughputs and the entirety of the Midcontinent’s non-US supply. Mexico is by far the largest market for US product exports at some 1.2 million b/d — roughly 18% of total US products exports — which might have to find a new home if the country institutes reciprocal tariffs. Trump last week announced plans for a 25% tariff on all imports from Canada and Mexico. It's widely viewed as a negotiating tactic to put pressure on US neighbors around border security. Still, the consequences of a trade war involving energy could be far-reaching for these highly interconnected economies… “Canada’s export options are also limited, with only the Trans Mountain pipeline (TMX) allowing for shipments to markets other than the US. TMX’s capacity is limited to 890,000 b/d. While substantial, it's not enough to offset the much larger flows sent daily to Canada’s southern neighbor. However, the existence of an alternative market for Canadian oil, even if small, puts Canada’s producers at a slight advantage in any tariff standoff. Sources told EIG that if Canadian producers or the government play hardball and cut off flows for even a week in retaliation to tariffs, the consequences for the US Midcontinent would be disastrous. Product inventories would drain quickly, and propane supplies — a key source of heat in winter — would dry up in several areas as well. Both Canada and Mexico could also respond with their own tariffs, enflaming an already painful situation… “But in theory, Canadian producers could pipe barrels all the way to tidewater at the US Gulf Coast and load them onto a tanker without involving any US-based entity.”
North Dakota Monitor: Judge OKs North Dakota request to intervene in Dakota Access pipeline lawsuit
Mary Steurer, 12/6/24
“A federal judge this week approved the state of North Dakota’s request to intervene as a co-defendant in the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s lawsuit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,” the North Dakota Monitor reports. “The lawsuit, filed in October, accuses the Army Corps of unlawfully allowing the Dakota Access Pipeline to operate without an easement, sufficient environmental study or robust emergency spill response plans, among other alleged violations. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe ultimately wants a federal judge to order that the pipeline be shut down. North Dakota argued in court filings last month that closing the pipeline, also known as DAPL, would cause the state government to lose out on hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue, jeopardize thousands of jobs and hamper regional supply chains. North Dakota also claimed that a federal court order draining DAPL would violate the state’s right to regulate its own land and resources.”
Reuters: BP seeks buyers for US natural gas pipeline system stake, sources say
Sarah McFarlane, David French and Ron Bousso, 12/6/24
“BP is seeking buyers for a stake in its U.S. natural gas pipeline network, four people with knowledge of the matter said,” Reuters reports. “The British energy company could raise up to $3 billion from the sale, two of the people told Reuters, with one of them adding that BP may sell up to a 49% stake in the business. The sale process is part of BP CEO Murray Auchincloss's drive to reduce the company's debt levels, which have risen over the past year, another two people told Reuters… “With its share price languishing, BP is facing investor pressure to improve performance and profitability amid concerns over the company's energy transition strategy. It has plans to sell stakes in its Lightsource BP solar business as well as its U.S. onshore wind division and offshore wind operations… “BP owns around 1,500 miles (2414 km) of pipelines that transport 1.1 million barrels of crude, natural gas and fuels per day across the United States, according to its website.”
Spectrum News: In letter, N.Y. House Republicans urge Hochul to reconsider opposition to Northern Access Pipeline
Luke Parsnow, 12/5/24
“Several New York and Pennsylvania House Republicans, led by Rep. Nick Langworthy, called on Gov. Kathy Hochul to end opposition to a proposed natural gas pipeline that would’ve run through parts of the Southern Tier and Western New York, according to a letter they sent Thursday,” Spectrum News reports. “Known as the Northern Access Pipeline, National Fuel Gas Co. proposed a decade ago to build a two-foot wide, 96-mile pipeline that would run through parts of Allegany, Cattaraugus and Erie counties, as well as one county in Pennsylvania, and carry natural gas to a variety of places in North America. In 2017, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the state Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) denied certification of the pipeline using the federal Clean Water Act. After years of a legal back and forth, delays and costs, National Fuel in recent weeks decided to cancel the project. “The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s (DEC) decision to stand in the way of this key natural gas pipeline infrastructure project — despite Federal approval — caused extensive delays and increased project costs, with the ongoing challenge of trying to develop in the current regulatory environment in New York,” Langworthy and the other lawmakers wrote in their letter. “This action has once again robbed our state of a key opportunity for greater energy security and prevented increased access across the Northeast, the Midwest, and Canada to affordable, reliable natural gas.” “...Co-signing the letter were New York Reps. Claudia Tenney, Michael Lawler, Nicole Malliotakis, Andrew Garbarino and Nick LaLota.”
Iowa Capital Dispatch: Natural gas company sues Iowa farmer over alleged easement violations
Clark Kauffman, 12/5/24
“A company that operates a natural gas pipeline in Howard County is suing an Iowa farmer for allegedly intruding on the company’s easement across his land,” the Iowa Capital Dispatch reports. “The Northern Natural Gas Company is suing Kenneth and Debra Moellers and the couple’s KDS Family Farms in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa. The company, which has owned and operated an active underground natural gas pipeline in Howard County since the 1960s, alleges it obtained an easement on Kenneth Moellers’ property near Cresco in 1960 when the land was owned by Mathias and Mary Riha. In 1992, Kenneth Moellers acquired the property and, according to the lawsuit, he has repeatedly attempted “multiple unlawful encroachments on the easement” since that time. Most recently, Moellers allegedly constructed a concrete manure run from an animal confinement. The manure run allegedly sits directly on top of Northern Natural Gas’ pipeline. The company alleges the manure run violates its easement rights and also “endangers safe and uninterrupted natural gas service” to Moellers and other customers… “The lawsuit seeks an injunction that would require Moellers to remove, at his expense, the concrete structures that now intrude on the easement and would prohibit any further attempts to build in that area.”
Daily Energy Insider: Edgewater Midstream finalizes acquisition of Sinco pipeline system from Shell
Dave Kovaleski, 12/5/24
“Edgewater Midstream closed on its acquisition of the Sinco Pipeline system and the Colex East and Colex West Terminals in the Houston refining corridor,” Daily Energy Insider reports. “Edgewater, a portfolio company of EnCap Flatrock Midstream, acquired the properties from certain subsidiaries of Shell USA. The Sinco Pipeline system includes a series of intrastate refined products pipelines connecting the Deer Park Refinery Complex to the Colex East and Colex West Terminals. It also connects various other refined products and crude oil terminals along the Houston Ship Channel. The Colex East and Colex West Terminals include approximately 3 million barrels of motor fuels storage capacity. The facilities provide a connection at the origin of the Colonial Pipeline, providing a direct conduit into the largest refined products pipeline in the country. In addition, the facilities also offer a connection to the Explorer Pipeline which delivers refined products from the U.S. Gulf Coast to Midwest markets.”
WASHINGTON UPDATES
InsideEPA: Time Running Short To Clinch Lame-Duck Permitting Deal, Backers Warn
12/4/24
“Lawmakers that support legislation to streamline energy project permitting are warning that time is running short to reach an agreement on the issue in the lame-duck session, even as some Republicans are saying their party might be unable to use party-line budget ‘reconciliation’ procedures to pass a broad permitting bill next year,” InsideEPA reports. “I don’t know that I’m optimistic in the lame duck, we’re just running out of time,” Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) said during a Dec. 4 panel at the North American Gas Forum. Rather than permitting, he said that lawmakers face a more pressing task to pass a stopgap federal spending bill. “That’s what our leaders are focused on.” At the same event, however, Rep. Scott Peters (D-CA) -- who has long advocated for permit streamlining proposals that would ease approvals for power transmission and other energy projects -- said he is still trying to clinch a lame-duck deal even as he acknowledged the time pressures. He called a pending proposal from Sens. Joe Manchin (I-WV) and John Barrasso (R-WY) a “good deal” due to its transmission provisions and its elements that give “a little bit of help” for natural gas. Now, Peters said he is working with House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Bruce Westerman (R-AR) on changes to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).”
E&E News: Musk, on Capitol Hill, says ‘get rid of all credits’
Andres Picon, 12/5/24
“Elon Musk, the billionaire electric vehicle mogul whom President-elect Donald Trump has tapped to help lead a government efficiency task force, told POLITICO’s E&E News on Thursday that he wants to eliminate tax breaks for EV buyers,” E&E News reports. “The Tesla CEO was on Capitol Hill on Thursday morning meeting with lawmakers to discuss his plans to downsize federal agencies and programs, slash what many Republicans consider wasteful spending, and boost the government’s productivity… “In response to a question about whether he would want to get rid of the $7,500 tax credit for certain electric vehicle purchases that Democrats passed as part of their 2022 climate law, Musk said, “I think we should get rid of all credits.” Musk, a major Trump donor, has previously stated on the social media platform X, which he also owns, that he believes the government should scrap tax credits… “Also, remove subsidies from all industries!” “...Congressional Republicans were making plans this week for using budget reconciliation early next year to roll back many of those energy and climate investments.”
InsideEPA: Judge Weighs Legality Of Phase 2 NEPA Rule After Landmark CEQ Ruling
12/4/24
“A federal judge is weighing whether the Biden administration’s phase 2 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) rule is lawful in light of the landmark appellate ruling finding the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) lacks authority to issue such rules, though government lawyers are strongly defending CEQ’s power to issue the binding measures,” InsideEPA reports. “Judge Daniel Traynor of the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota late last month sought supplemental briefing in State of Iowa, et al. v. CEQ, et al., the case challenging the phase 2 rule, after plaintiff states filed a Nov. 13 proposed notice of supplemental authority notifying the court of the appellate decision that CEQ’s rulemaking authority was ultra vires. CEQ quickly opposed the filing on procedural grounds, saying additional briefing is needed if the court is going to consider state efforts to make new arguments that were not part of their initial briefs. While Traynor sought a quick round of supplemental briefing on the issue, during a Nov. 20 hearing on competing summary judgment motions he extended more detailed supplemental filing deadlines until later this month, according to minutes of the hearing posted on the court’s docket.”
E&E News: The ESA Is About To Board The Trump Roller Coaster
Michael Doyle, 12/4/24
“The incoming Trump administration and its emboldened congressional allies could soon reshape the Endangered Species Act without really touching the 1973 law,” E&E News reports. “The GOP-controlled Congress could rescind last-minute ESA-related actions. Appropriations bill riders and targeted legislation could block Biden-era moves. Office budgets could be cut, if Congress goes along. By themselves, the Interior Department’s new political appointees could rewrite Biden administration regulations. “I expect they will just have a knee-jerk reaction and pull back regs, shooting themselves in the foot on a policy that could be incredibly useful for infrastructure and agriculture,” Timothy Male, executive director of the Environmental Policy Innovation Center, told E&E.”
Energy News Network: Advocates frustrated by lack of transparency, engagement on regional hydrogen hub projects
Kathiann M. Kowalski, 12/6/24
“Community and environmental justice advocates say the Biden administration is failing to deliver promised transparency and public engagement around its $7 billion clean hydrogen hub initiative,” Energy News Network reports. “Engagement isn’t merely leading people into a process that’s going to happen with or without them,” Tom Torres, hydrogen program director for the Ohio River Valley Institute, a nonprofit serving one of the regions where federally funded partnerships are trying to lay the groundwork for new local hydrogen economies, told ENN. “It means meaningfully involving people in the decisions about the project.” “...Since then, the department has held online briefings and virtual listening sessions for each hub, but advocates told ENN they are not getting the kind of information necessary to assess who will be impacted by the projects and how. Torres and others told ENN they want more than just dots on a map. They want to know how hydrogen will be produced, how it will be used, and how it will get to end users. For projects that depend on carbon capture, they want to know how and where the carbon will be captured, transported and stored. And once the specifics are known, they want a chance to have meaningful input on the final projects. Spokespeople for the Department of Energy and regional hubs told ENN the answers to those questions are still being worked out and that more engagement is on the horizon. Advocates are increasingly frustrated and fear that community input will come too late to affect how the hubs are developed. “It doesn’t make sense … on one hand to say there’s not enough on paper to tell the public about, but on the other hand there is enough to allocate almost $1 billion for these companies,” Torres told ENN… “In May, dozens of groups urged the Department of Energy to suspend funding discussions for the ARCH2 project until the public receives detailed information beyond general maps and short project descriptions… “Groups have been trying to get answers from the Department of Energy for more than a year, Chris Chyung, executive director of Indiana Conservation Voters, told ENN. In his view, the agency’s approach “is just flouting the law.”
STATE UPDATES
Washington Post: N.C. town accuses utility giant of deceiving the public on climate change
Anumita Kaur and Brady Dennis, 12/5/24
“A small North Carolina town is suing Duke Energy, alleging in a complaint that one of the nation’s largest electric utilities has “actively participated in a far-reaching, decades-long campaign to deceive the public and decision-makers” about the dangers of climate change,” the Washington Post reports. “The complaint alleges that the corporation has known about the perils posed by the climate crisis for more than 50 years, and rather than mitigate its impact, has instead “engaged in widespread ‘greenwashing’ to suggest to the public that it is committed to clean energy and addressing the climate crisis,” even as the problem worsened… “It’s among more than a dozen cities, counties and states that have sued fossil fuel interests — predominantly oil companies — in recent years, seeking to hold them responsible for damage they say the corporations have caused… “Carrboro’s case against Duke has a David-and-Goliath element: Duke Energy provides electricity to more than 8 million customers across six states, including much of North Carolina and parts of South Carolina, Florida, Indiana, Ohio and Kentucky. Meanwhile, Carrboro — known locally for its progressive politics — spans just under seven square miles and maintains a small population. Carrboro’s attorney, Matt Quinn, told the Post that the town has hired consultants to assess the cost of climate-induced damages, and expects it may be up to $60 million… “Some of the efforts to deceive the public, according to the lawsuit, included the company paying substantial dues to trade organizations that “served as mere front groups” for the energy and utility industry. Duke’s officials were often board members or otherwise leaders in these groups, the lawsuit adds.”
Inside Climate News: It’s Do or Die Time for Philly Hydrogen Hub, and Some Green Groups Are Rooting for Death
Kyle Bagenstose, 12/6/24
“As energy wonks descended on a downtown hotel for a hydrogen conference, witches were waiting for them in the parking lot. Donning a black, horned hat and green face paint, Delaware Riverkeeper Maya van Rossum and a coven of fellow protesters played off the release of the movie “Wicked” to lambast what they see as voodoo: green hydrogen,” Inside Climate News reports. “Don’t believe the hydrogen hype!” they chanted to passersby last month. The tone was in stark contrast to a celebratory press conference President Joe Biden hosted in the city a year earlier, announcing a federal investment of $750 million in the region to build out one of seven hydrogen hubs scattered across the country. Politicians including Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and U.S. Sen. Bob Casey hailed the announcement of the Mid-Atlantic Clean Hydrogen Hub (MACH2), as did a menagerie of local officials and union leaders… “Technically, Biden’s announcement in October 2023 was only an intent to award; funding negotiations are ongoing between the U.S. Department of Energy and a consortium of would-be recipients. In the interim, a collection of environmental groups in the region, including the Delaware Riverkeeper Network and Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living, have taken up opposition, contending that the promises of MACH2 are oversold and that the hub, if it proceeds, could harm fenceline communities while potentially exacerbating global warming instead of easing it. But likely scarier to supporters of the hub are economic and political headwinds. Over the past year, experts told ICN, the costs of creating truly “green” hydrogen—produced using 100 percent renewable energy—have risen. That’s spooked some players from the space and created cracks in the foundations of MACH2 and other hubs before the mortar even had time to dry. Part of the problem, experts say, is hand-wringing over the long-awaited release of Treasury Department rules on federal financial incentives for hydrogen production, now expected this month, which could impact producers’ bottom lines. And now that former President Donald Trump is headed back to the White House, some fear the entire federal initiative could go up in flames—hubs, tax credits and all. “There is a huge potential for Trump’s lack of focus on emissions or decarbonization [to] hinder progress of hydrogen hubs,” Bridget van Dorsten, a principal analyst studying hydrogen at the consulting firm Wood Mackenzie, told ICN. “Without funding, we may continue to see partners pull out of hubs.”
The Sum & Substance: Business leaders deflated by preliminary state rules on carbon management
Ed Sealover, 12/5/24
“Colorado regulators gave preliminary approval Thursday to the state’s first comprehensive rules on carbon capture and sequestration — stringent rules that business leaders warn could scare off projects that are needed to meet statewide emissions-reduction goals,” The Sum & Substance reports. “The rules that Colorado Energy and Carbon Management Commission leaders are set to give final approval to on Dec. 11 will be included in the state’s application to take regulatory primacy for the growing sector from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency… “But many said that if Colorado rules make it infeasible to build here, they’re likely to invest instead in states like Wyoming, Texas or Louisiana — using significant tax credits being offered by the federal government… “And after the five ECMC members appeared to coalesce around final rules on Thursday, several business leaders said those regulations could make it so difficult to guarantee approval of permits by the state that many operators likely won’t spend resources even trying to meet them. “If you look at other states with easier rules, people will spend their dollars there,” warned Christy Woodward, regulatory affairs advisor for the Colorado Chamber of Commerce… “That may be a welcome sentiment to a handful of environmental organizations who, while seeking stricter regulations from the ECMC, also said they believe the technology is “dangerous” and a distraction from proven carbon-reduction strategies, as Wild Earth Guardians attorney Katherine Merlin told the ECMC. “This is not something we’re holistically in favor of,” added Ean Thomas Tafoya, state director for GreenLatinos, about carbon sequestration… “We remain concerned that this will be a sign to companies that Colorado is closed to CCS projects,” warned John Jacus, a Davis Graham attorney representing Carbon Storage Solutions, which is building a Class VI well for Front Range Energy near Windsor… “If there is too stringent a regulation, too high a cost … you’re going to have less of this technology,” Peter Omasta, climate action manager for cement manufacturer GCC Pueblo, told the ECMC… “Several groups also asked commissioners to take into account in their cumulative-impact analyses the environmental impacts of the pipelines connecting the wells to underground storage, citing accidents elsewhere that have spilled carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. However, as the ECMC does not have jurisdiction over pipelines, commissioners said they could not consider that.”
Politico: A Christmas gift for California oil refiners
12/5/24
“Oil refiners’ profits are safe, at least for now, from the California Energy Commission,” Politico reports. “The agency said today that it's again delaying its decision on whether to impose a first-in-the-nation cap on refiners’ profits. It had been scheduled to make the decision this fall, then delayed to the end of the year and now expects to put out a preliminary proposal in the spring, spokesperson Lindsay Buckley told Politico. Gov. Gavin Newsom first pitched a profit cap on refiners back in 2022, after California gasoline prices spiked to an average of $6.44 per gallon. Newsom accused oil companies of “gouging” Californians and pledged to put a stop to it with his proposed cap. The law tasked the CEC with deciding whether such a cap would indeed help with gas prices (the oil industry says it won’t) and then deciding how high to set the cap if it’s warranted… “Staff is currently assessing how resupply and minimum inventory rules could interact with a potential maximum margin and penalty with plans to present a high-level framework next year,” she told Politico. The cap’s biggest supporter, Jamie Court of Consumer Watchdog, told Politico there’s no need for delay. He even brought President-elect Donald Trump into it. “The penalty has been studied to death,” he told Politico. “I think frankly they’re concerned about rocking the boat with Trump in office, and that is no way to protect the people of California.”
Associated Press: North Dakota Governor Charts His Path To Interior With A Rosy State Oil And Gas Outlook
Jack Dura, 12/4/24
“President-elect Donald Trump has given his choice for Interior secretary a mandate to ‘Drill baby drill,’ and on Wednesday his pick, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, offered a rosy budget picture to lawmakers based largely on his state’s success in extracting near-record levels of oil and gas from the ground,” the Associated Press reports. “Burgum, whose term ends next week, noted North Dakota’s status as the nation’s No. 3 oil-producing state in his final proposed budget before he begins his role in Trump’s administration, pending Senate confirmation. Besides serving as Interior secretary, Trump has chosen Burgum to lead a newly created National Energy Council that intends to ensure U.S. ‘energy dominance.’ “We look forward to the next four years where we believe that there’s going to be a shift towards innovation over regulation and an opportunity for North Dakota and our mineral owners to be able to more quickly and easily get permitting to access those natural resources for our country,” Burgum told a packed House chamber, also lamenting dozens of energy-related federal regulations his state is fighting.”
Capital and Main: In New Mexico, Democrats Strike an Oil and Gas Gusher: ‘Money Buys Access’
Jerry Redfern, 12/3/24
“Chevron gave more. So did ConocoPhillips. Exxon Mobil gave twice as much. A review by Capital & Main of New Mexico state campaign donations for the 2024 election shows the country’s biggest oil and gas production companies gave more to Democratic candidates than to the industry’s traditional Republican allies,” Capital and Main reports. “Records show the top 10 oil and gas industry contributors gave $1.2 million to Democratic state candidates while giving $1.1 million to Republicans, comprising roughly two-thirds of the entire industry’s donations to individual candidates in this year’s state elections. While contributions by major corporations to individuals lean left, total oil and gas donations in the state still favor Republicans, who received $2.1 million compared to $1.6 million for Democrats, for $3.7 million in all. Republicans made up the difference with hundreds more donations from smaller companies and individuals in the industry… “Once again, donations from Chevron dwarfed all others. The company gave $724,000 directly to candidates in state races. The next closest was Marathon Oil at $243,500. Both companies’ donations favored Democrats — by a few thousand dollars in Chevron’s case, and by a more than 2:1 ratio in Marathon Oil’s case. Oil and gas interests gave another $1.75 million to political action committees, or PACs. Nearly a third of that — $497,000 — came from Chevron alone, bringing the company’s total donations to $1.22 million… “In federal elections, those multinational firms give overwhelmingly to Republicans: 85% of donations in the case of Chevron and 80% by Marathon Oil, according to federal campaign data collected by OpenSecrets. Overall, oil and gas companies gave 7.5 to 1 in favor of Republican candidates seeking federal office. “It is not surprising,” Michael Rocca, political scientist and director of the public policy program at the University of New Mexico, told Capital and Main. “They are giving money to power.” Nationally, oil and gas companies and production are concentrated in Republican-leaning states such as Texas, Oklahoma and North Dakota. But in New Mexico, Democrats hold all the power, with comfortable leads in both legislative branches, as well as the governorship and every other major elected office.”
KCAL: $71 million settlement reached over Aliso Canyon, the largest methane gas leak in U.S. history
Marissa Wenzke, 12/4/24
“The distribution of a $71 million settlement for the Aliso Canyon gas leak was announced Wednesday, a payout intended to address environmental concerns stemming from the leak which released more than 100,000 tons of methane into the San Fernando Valley nearly 10 years ago,” KCAL reports. “The massive settlement being paid out by SoCal Gas, which owns the Aliso Canyon Natural Gas Storage Field in Porter Ranch, will go towards funding construction and infrastructure developments intended to help neighborhoods affected by the four-month-long leak — which federal officials have described as the largest methane gas leak in U.S. history.”
EXTRACTION
Canadian Press: Alberta minister wants to see $100B in data centre infrastructure in next five years
Jack Farrell, 12/4/24
“Alberta Technology Minister Nate Glubish says he’s hoping to see $100 billion worth of artificial intelligence data centres under construction within the next five years,” the Canadian Press reports. “Such centres are filled with computer servers used by companies like Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, to develop and train large-scale artificial intelligence models. These centres, depending on size, require loads of electricity to run. In an interview, Glubish told CP Meta, as well as other major companies like Google and Amazon, are on the hunt for space, and he wants Alberta to be an option. “That’s where the home run comes in, in terms of increased investment, increased jobs and increased economic activity,” Glubish told CP. He added that, through the government’s new data centre attraction strategy announced Wednesday, the government has created a “concierge program” to attract companies to Alberta… “Glubish told CP since Alberta’s deregulated electricity market allows for off-grid power generation — permitting power generators to strike deals with private companies and supply them directly — the province is an ideal landing spot for many companies… “The report said that if natural gas were to power six gigawatts of electricity for data centres, it would create an estimated 16 million tonnes of annual greenhouse gas emissions, although the use of carbon capture and storage could provide a partial offset.”
Canadian Occupational Safety: Regulator accused of selling out safety over Imperial Oil spill fine
Shane Mercer, 12/5/24
“The Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) is drawing sharp criticism after fining Imperial Oil $50,000 for a 263-day toxic tailings spill at the Kearl oil sands site in northern Alberta,” Canadian Occupational Safety reports. “Advocacy groups, including Environmental Defence, argue the penalty fails to reflect the gravity of the environmental damage and the regulatory lapses involved. “This fine amounts to a 95% discount on what could have been imposed,” Julia Levin, associate director at Environmental Defence, told COS.. Levin notes that Imperial Oil, which reported quarterly profits of $2.9 billion in 2023, is being charged just 0.004% of those earnings. “This is a slap on the wrist, sending the message that Alberta protects polluters over people and the environment.” The spill, which began in May 2022, led to the release of over 45 million liters of wastewater containing harmful levels of arsenic, iron, and other toxins. According to Environmental Defence, local Indigenous communities were not informed about the incident until February 2023, after they raised concerns about contaminated water and wildlife. “The penalty is an insult to affected communities,” Levin states, adding that it undermines public trust in the province's ability to manage environmental risks.”
Press release: Regulator sells out community safety for pennies on the dollar, as Imperial Oil gets 95 per cent “discount” on oil sands spill fine
12/5/24
“Concerned Indigenous Nations, community, health, and environmental groups are urging the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) to reconsider its decision to issue a meager $50,000 penalty to Imperial Oil for its 263-day-long toxic tailings spillage incident at its Kearl Mine. Yesterday, Ecojustice submitted a request for reconsideration on behalf of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, Keepers of the Water, and the Council of Canadians Edmonton Chapter, the Alberta Wilderness Association, Environmental Defence Canada, and the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, demanding the Regulator to impose a fine that reflects the severity of the incident and is in accordance with its own laws. While the Alberta Energy Regulator has the ability, and responsibility, to hold companies that break the law to account, it has repeatedly demonstrated an unwillingness to enforce its own laws when it comes to industry rulebreakers — leaving Albertans to bear the costs and clean up the mess. The unreasonably low $50,000 penalty, which took the Regulator more than two years to issue, represents just 0.004 per cent of Imperial’s $1.13 billion Q2 profits from 2024. Furthermore, the AER’s claims of imposing a fine “representing the maximum base penalty table amount permissible under the regulation” in this case is downright false: the law gives them authority to issue Imperial Oil a much larger fine of at least $1.3 million in this case, but they opted not to. This discretionary decision calls into question the AER’s commitment to fulfilling its duty to protect the public and hold industry accountable. The Regulator’s weak response to such a significant spill does little to deter Imperial Oil, or other large corporations, from future violations that threaten both human and environmental health… “By repeatedly disregarding its own responsibility, the AER is risking the health and safety of Albertans, while big polluters like Imperial Oil continue to operate, and profit, unscathed.”
TODAY IN GREENWASHING
PTBO Canada: Enbridge Gas Invests In Selwyn Fire Department to Support Firefighter Training
12/5/24
“An investment from Enbridge Gas Inc. is helping the Selwyn Fire Department to support firefighter training, announced at Selwyn Fire Hall 1 in Bridgenorth on Thursday,” PTBO Canada reports. “The investment helps the Fire Department purchase firefighting training materials through Safe Community Project Assist–a program with the Fire Marshal’s Public Fire Safety Council (FMPFSC). It supplements existing training for Ontario volunteer and composite fire departments in the communities where Enbridge Gas operates. “At Enbridge, safety is at the centre of everything we do and a value we live by,” says Jeff Braithwaite, GTA East Supervisor Operations, Enbridge Gas… “This year’s $125,000 investment from Enbridge Gas will be shared by 25 Ontario fire departments, including Selwyn Fire Department.”
OPINION
CleanTechnica: Carbon Capture And Sequestration — The Dream That Won’t Die
Steve Hanley, 12/5/24
“Carbon capture and sequestration represent a shining opportunity for some, like Heirloom, a California startup that opened its first demonstration plant last year,” Steve Hanley writes for CleanTechnica. “...And here’s the thing: A spokesperson for Heirloom told Canary Media recently that the cost of removing a ton of carbon dioxide is between $600 and $1,000 per ton. I am no mathematician, as my readers know all too well, but 40 billion tons multiplied by $600 a ton — the best case scenario at present — is $24 trillion a year. Heirloom expects the industry to get to a general price of between $200 and $300 per ton by the early part of the next decade, adding that the startup “has line of sight to profitability at those prices.” “...We believe DAC is all about cost, cost, and cost — and that it will only scale to make a meaningful difference on climate change if it is affordable,” Heirloom CEO and co-founder Shashank Samala said in a statement. That is perhaps the most fatuous, self-serving statement we have heard around CleanTechnica headquarters in a long time… “We know that new technologies take time to scale and prices drop as sales go up, but people have been trying to spin straw into gold in the world of climate capture for quite some time without any tangible success. Mostly, it is a cruel joke that the fossil fuel industry has embraced as a way of saying don’t worry about carbon emissions today, because someday in the far distant future we will figure out how to deal with them. In the meantime, just go back to sleep while we keep on with business as usual. What is especially galling is that they expect someone else to pay to clean up their mess while they laugh all the way to the bank… “Sharp-eyed readers will notice the typical news story about carbon sequestration seldom mentions how long the carbon will be sequestered — a material flaw in any conversation about direct air capture. The assumption is that once sequestered, it will stay sequestered, but we all know about the word “assume” by now, don’t we? That suggests all the fancy promises we hear about sucking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and piping it underground are apt to be much too optimistic at best and deliberately misleading at worst… “They have been lying to us for 7 decades and are not about to let little things like truth or accuracy interfere with their carbon capture dream.”
Counter Punch: Is Carbon Capture Also a Hoax?
Robert Hunziker, 12/5/24
“Climate change has become a dollars and cents issue, especially for U.S. homeowners. It’s no longer easily ignored or brushed away as a ‘hoax,” Robert Hunziker writes for Counter Punch. “...Almost everybody wants to believe that carbon capture will save the day. After all, something must be done to stave off an increasingly destructive climate system, right? Hopefully, the magic of technology will come to rescue civilization from the perils of human-caused global warming. But that’s a wish-list that doesn’t necessarily hold true… “Extensive research shows that carbon capture, whether Direct Air Capture (DAC) or Carbon Capture and Sequester (CCS), is not a fast enough fix-it for the pace of global warming, unless massive infrastructure buildout with vastly improved technology is accomplished. More likely, as things currently stand, it’s a Trojan Horse that makes people feel warm and fuzzy that human ingenuity will conquer the biggest threat to life-supporting ecosystems. In fact, the sheer scale of the problem overwhelms the technology it’s designed to fix… “Yet, carbon capture has a long history of failure for decades… “Moreover, global CO2 removal is an immense task, in fact, nearly beyond comprehension… “Not only is DAC’s operating proficiency like a pinprick, but nearly the same proficiency greets global Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) poised to double to 435 million metric tons per year in the face of 37.4 billion metric tons emitted per year equals approximately 1% removed per year… “Meanwhile, numerous scientific indicators point to big trouble right around the corner, tipping back and forth at the edge, teetering over the climate disaster zone. This requires an immediate halt to CO2 emissions.”
Corpus Christi Caller Times: Growth of carbon capture and storage will bring jobs to the Coastal Bend
Mike Culbertson is the president and CEO of the Corpus Christi Regional Economic Development Corp., and Adam Gawarecki is the president and CEO of the San Patricio Economic Development Corp, 12/5/24
“In the next decade, forecasts suggest that demand for electricity in Texas will nearly double. It might seem that this rapid spike in energy demand would conflict with the need for greater sustainability and lower emissions, but carbon capture and storage (CCS) is quickly becoming a solution that can benefit the Coastal Bend and other communities like it around the state,” Mike Culbertson and Adam Gawarecki write for the Corpus Christi Caller Times. “...Carbon capture and storage is a proven technology that has been utilized in Texas and across the globe for more than 50 years… “As with oil and gas, our region has all the key ingredients — a concentration of industries, an experienced workforce, an existing pipeline network and unique geological formations. Leading researchers from Texas A&M, the University of Texas, University of Houston and other respected institutions around the world have intensively studied CCS and demonstrated that it is safe and effective. It’s a technology that is well understood and available right now… “Among its key findings, the study estimated the total economic impact of CCS projects in Nueces and San Patricio County could be more than $1 billion. The benefits of CCS would also be felt statewide, with projections of roughly $33.4 million in increased county level tax revenues, or over $131,000 on average for each of Texas’ 254 counties. That could mean new equipment for first responders, or better libraries and parks… “Next year could be a momentous opportunity for expanding CCS, as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Texas Legislature address regulatory changes that would establish the framework for scaling CCS across the Lone Star State.”
Anchorage Daily News: Building a gas pipeline for energy and economic security
Doug Tansy is the business manager of IBEW Local 1547, 12/5/24
“The Anchorage Daily News editorial board clearly read the recent analysis of the financial viability and economic benefits of the Alaska LNG gas line, but must have spilled coffee on the pages that outline the substantial reasons for working together to bring this project across the finish line — namely, the $16 billion in benefits the state will receive from utilizing our own natural gas,” Doug Tansy writes for the Anchorage Daily News. “Chief among the benefits detailed by Wood Mackenzie, the independent energy experts who conducted the analysis for the Legislature, are jobs. Jobs we won’t create if we import energy for the foreseeable future… “Building the Alaska LNG pipeline would solve challenges we face today and would build a stronger Alaska for tomorrow… “The ADN editorial stated concern for the “many other state services that find themselves short on funding,” but it did not mention how Alaska actually pays for these items — the gas pipeline’s $16 billion boost for our economy will feed, not starve, these services. Alaska LNG will deliver dependable energy for Alaskans and a valuable product for export, providing hundreds of millions of dollars to state coffers each year through production taxes, royalties, corporate income taxes, and property taxes… “Now don’t get me wrong, we will need to import energy for a short time, less than five years. But the pipeline gives us control over our own energy destiny with all the benefits that will be missed with permanent imports… “We do not face a choice between imports and a pipeline — we need both.”