EXTRACTED: Daily News Clips 1/5/26

PIPELINE NEWS

• Iowa Capital Dispatch: Landowners ask court to reconsider decision to pause pipeline permit lawsuit

• Iowa Capital Dispatch: Property taxes, eminent domain debate to return in 2026 Iowa legislative session

• KMA: Moore: Carbon pipeline, eminent domain legislation a difficult topic

• KMTV: Iowa lawmaker predicts carbon pipelines will be priority in 2026 legislative session

• Opinion-Tribune: Supervisors Hear Ag Land Inspection Presentation On Proposed CO2 Pipeline

• KCLU: Company’s stock spikes after federal government okays restart of Santa Barbara County oil pipeline

• Noozhawk: Appeals Court Denies Request to Stall Sable’s Restart of Oil Production

• Santa Barbara Independent: Environmental Groups Sue Trump Administration over “Emergency” Approval for Sable Pipeline Restart

• The Cool Down: Congressional delegation demands accountability after BP pipeline leak causes travel disruptions: ‘This malfunction jeopardized airline operations’

• The Center Square: Constitution Pipeline revives application with federal regulators

• E&E News: Supreme Court books arguments in energy cases

• Midland Reporter-Telegram: Energy Transfer weighs converting Permian NGL pipeline to gas, signaling Waha relief

• Alaska Beacon: Pipeline deal and disasters were highlight and low point of 2025, Alaska governor says

• KABC: Significant land movement likely caused Castaic gas line break, SoCalGas says

• Fort Worth Star-Telegram: Oil spill’s environmental threat near Lake Arlington assessed by Texas biologist

• Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA): European gas pipeline companies report less than 1% of their emissions

WASHINGTON UPDATES

• E&E News: Progressives blame oil imperialism for Venezuela incursion

• Reuters: Trump says US oil companies will spend billions in Venezuela

• Roll Call: Whitehouse says he’ll stall key bills over offshore wind pause

• Reuters: US sets new LNG export records in banner year marked by new capacity

STATE UPDATES

• E&E News: Watchdog sues oil majors for gas price hike linked to California reg

• Virginia Business: Dominion gas plant in Chesterfield on hold, while SCC considers petition

• Louisiana Illuminator: State rejects Smitty’s Supply request to dispose of wastewater, storm runoff in drainage

• Fullerton Observer: Orange County Supervisors Foley and Sarmiento Oppose New Offshore Oil Drilling Plan

• Carbon Herald: Kansas Steps Onto Carbon Capture Map With EPA Nod For Ethanol Project

• Texas Tribune: Indigenous groups fight to save rediscovered settlement site on Texas coast

• Kent County News: Decades after hospital oil spill, state closes case

EXTRACTION

• U.S. Dept. of Energy: Project Selections for FOA 3365: Carbon Capture, Removal, and Conversion Test Centers

CLIMATE FINANCE

• Bangor Daily News: Why Maine didn’t come close to meeting a 2026 deadline to divest from fossil fuels

OPINION

• The Alpena News: The Straits of Mackinaw polluted with politics

• Bleeding Heartland: Public interests and property rights: The pipeline looms for Iowa lawmakers

• Cleveland.com: Carbon capture and storage bill will put Ohio communities at risk

• Santa Barbara Independent: California Should Determine if Pipeline Is Safe to Operate

• San Luis Obispo Tribune: California coastal communities threatened by federal calls to drill
  

PIPELINE NEWS

Iowa Capital Dispatch: Landowners ask court to reconsider decision to pause pipeline permit lawsuit
Cami Koons, 12/29/25

“Landowners opposed to a carbon sequestration project in Iowa have asked a state court to reconsider its decision to pause a lawsuit over the permit for the pipeline until state officials rule on a filed amendment,” the Iowa Capital Dispatch reports. “Landowners argue the Polk County District Court’s decision to send the permit back to Iowa Utilities Commission “relied heavily” on the existence of a South Dakota law prohibiting the use of eminent domain for carbon sequestration pipelines… “Polk County District Court Judge Scott Beattie referred to the law as the “S.D. CO2 Pipeline Ban” in the decision and said it “render the IUC’s Final Order void” and would require Summit to find a route outside of South Dakota to get to its planned underground storage site in North Dakota. Landowners requesting the reconsideration of the case said the South Dakota law is “not a ban” on carbon dioxide pipelines in the state and that the law should not be a “relevant or material factor” in the case as Summit could still pass through South Dakota under the law. “(The South Dakota law) is not a ban on Summit’s project in South Dakota and is not a ban on the citing and construction of carbon oxide pipelines in, through, or across South Dakota, that change in law is not material to the IUC’s South Dakota condition,” the motion for reconsideration said. The motion from landowners argues that because Summit has not stated that it no longer plans to route the pipeline through South Dakota, the remand to the IUC gives the company a “second bite at the apple” and a “business flexibility” which leaves affected landowners “in the lurch.” “…The landowners, represented by Brian Jorde of Domina Law Group, asked the court to reverse its finding that the South Dakota law renders the IUC order void and to reverse its remand to instead set a briefing schedule for the appeal. If the court does not reverse its decision, the motion asks the court to “specifically identify” and direct the IUC to “rescind route approval and eminent domain approval for all portions of the Iowa route from the South Dakota border back to the nearest connecting Iowa ethanol plant” in order to avoid “pipelines to nowhere.”

Iowa Capital Dispatch: Property taxes, eminent domain debate to return in 2026 Iowa legislative session
Robin Opsahl, 12/29/25

“…Another issue carrying over from 2025 is how to address the use of eminent domain in carbon capture pipeline projects,” the Iowa Capital Dispatch reports. “The Senate passed the bill in a 27-22 vote, but Reynolds vetoed the measure, saying the legislation combined “valid concerns with vague legal standards and sweeping mandates that reach far beyond their intended targets.” There is still a strong push from Republicans calling for state lawmakers to address the subject, specifically to address some landowners’ issues with the Summit Carbon Solutions project. But some of the same concerns from Republicans, including the governor and Senate leaders, who opposed last year’s legislation, remain in play — meaning a consensus on how to tackle the property rights issue has yet to be reached. Klimesh told the Dispatch he plans to introduce legislation within the first week of session that would allow companies to seek voluntary easements within a 10-mile radius of the corridor approved by the Iowa Utilities Commission in the permit process. This proposal, Klimesh told the Dispatch, would allow carbon sequestration pipeline projects to move forward without having to use eminent domain to build a pipeline against a property owner’s wishes… “This proposal was one of the suggestions offered in an amendment to the 2025 legislation by Sen. Mike Bousselot, R-Ankeny, which was not adopted during Senate debate. This approach may differ from how Iowa House Republicans plan to tackle the subject. Grassley told the Dispatch House Republicans plan to introduce legislation next year focused specifically on the use of eminent domain… “Where I think we end up this session, whatever comes from the House, is going to be a little bit more tailored to eminent domain,” Grassley told the Dispatch. “I know the bill was a little bit broader than we passed over to the Senate last year, that the governor then vetoed. …The caucus, in the meantime, has recognized that that’s been where we’ve had our focus for the last several years – its been around eminent domain.” “…Meyer told the Dispatch he does not see the proposal brought up by Klimesh on expanding the pipeline corridor as a way to put the issue to rest, saying he believes House Republicans will aim for more substantive action on eminent domain.”

KMA: Moore: Carbon pipeline, eminent domain legislation a difficult topic
Ethan Hewett, 1/2/26

“…State Representative Tom Moore is among the state lawmakers expecting more debate at the state capitol after lawmakers gavel in to session on January 12th,” KMA reports. “Because the governor’s veto came while the legislature was out of session, Moore tells KMA News he has not been privy to much of the discussion on how the legislation could be altered… “At least one reason for the governor’s veto was the “unintended consequences” of the bill, with some concerns raised about the impacts on Tallgrass’ proposed Trailblazer CO2 Pipeline, running from the Iowa-Nebraska border to SIRE’s ethanol plant in Council Bluffs, without the use of eminent domain. Thus, Moore told KMA finding a compromise is a tall task. “You’ve got to find ways to make it equitable for the corn growers and equitable for the ethanol producers,” he told KMA. “But with all of those that are concerned about their property rights, we’ve got to take that into huge account as well.” “…Advocates for such legislation and landowner property rights, including Montgomery County resident Jan Norris, are calling for a ban on the use of eminent domain for carbon sequestration projects. Norris updated the Mills County Board of Supervisors on possible legislation at their regular meeting earlier this month. “The pipeline-landowner group is simply asking that eminent domain be removed from use on CO2 pipelines,” Norris told KMA. “There are many legislators who will be working hard to make this happen, but the Senate leadership is not on board. The hard-fought bill that was passed last year was vetoed by the governor.”

KMTV: Iowa lawmaker predicts carbon pipelines will be priority in 2026 legislative session
Katrina Markel, 1/2/26

“State Representative Dave Sieck believes the Iowa Legislature won’t accomplish much this year unless lawmakers address the contentious carbon pipeline issue,” KMTV reports. “Sieck, who represents Mills and Fremont counties as well as part of Pottawattamie County in the Iowa House, outlined what he expects to be the top three priorities when the 2026 legislative session begins on Jan. 12. “Number one, is the carbon pipeline issue’s come to head so many times. I don’t think a lot of legislation will get through unless we deal with some type of a bill on the carbon pipeline,” Sieck told KMTV. The carbon capture pipeline debate has split the GOP majority in the Legislature. Lawmakers are weighing concerns about pipeline safety and the potential use of eminent domain verses potential benefits for the agricultural economy.”

Opinion-Tribune: Supervisors Hear Ag Land Inspection Presentation On Proposed CO2 Pipeline
Joe Foreman, 12/31/25

“A proposed CO2 (carbon dioxide) pipeline that would pass through portions of northwest Mills County was at the center of discussion during the Dec. 23 regular meeting of the Mills County Board Of Supervisors,” the Opinion-Tribune reports. “Tallgrass, a Nebraska-based energy infrastructure company, plans to construct a 4.6-mile pipeline to carry CO2 from the Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy (SIRE) ethanol production plant south of Council Bluffs to the Trailblazer Pipeline in Nebraska. Once in Nebraska, the CO2 will flow through the pipeline to a sequestration hub in Wyoming for permanent underground storage… “Mills County Supervisors Lonnie Mayberry, Richard Crouch and Jack Sayers first learned of the proposed pipeline project last January. Instead of coming to a meeting of the board of supervisors, Tallgrass contacted each supervisor individually to inform them of the proposed project. The supervisors were also told by Tallgrass that because the pipeline will be less than 5 miles long, Iowa Code allows the company to build it without having to state the company’s intentions or sharing information about the project at a public information meeting… “Prior to Paradise’s presentation, the county board heard a couple of public comments regarding CO2 pipelines. Dan Stanley voiced concerns about eminent domain and suggested the supervisors pass a strong ordinance regarding carbon pipelines… “Stanley questioned, “Who bears the risks and profits” when a pipeline is constructed? “These pipelines are built primarily to secure federal carbon capture tax credits,” he said. “The economic benefits go to private corporations. Those people that live along the route, our neighbors and farmers, bear the danger of land disruption and long-term liability if something goes wrong.”

KCLU: Company’s stock spikes after federal government okays restart of Santa Barbara County oil pipeline
Lance Orozco, 1/3/26

“The stock of a company involved in controversial efforts to restart the Santa Barbara County oil pipeline which ruptured in 2015 spiked Friday, after word the federal government approved the restart effort,” KCLU reports. “Sable Offshore Corporation’s stock rose nearly 20% in price Friday. On Wednesday, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a request by a coalition of environmental groups seeking a stay of the pipeline restart approval by the Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration… “However, Sable is still facing a myriad of other legal challenges from regulators and project opponents. Sable is seeking to restart the pipeline which ruptured on the Gaviota Coast in 2015, causing a massive oil spill… “Environmentalists say restarting the aging infrastructure would set the stage for another major accident.”

Noozhawk: Appeals Court Denies Request to Stall Sable’s Restart of Oil Production
Giana Magnoli, 1/2/26

“A federal appeals court this week denied a request to stay, or pause, federal approval of Sable Offshore Corp.’s restart plans for Santa Barbara County oil production,” Noozhawk reports. “…The Santa Barbara-based Environmental Defense Center and other groups filed a lawsuit challenging the PHMSA and Department of Transportation decision, saying the pipelines still pose a risk to the Gaviota Coast. The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision Wednesday denying the request to stay the approval, and set a deadline of Jan. 26 for an opening brief in the case… “The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors recently denied the company’s request to transfer local permits from the previous owner/operator, with officials citing concerns about Sable’s safety record, criminal charges and ongoing lawsuits.”

Santa Barbara Independent: Environmental Groups Sue Trump Administration over “Emergency” Approval for Sable Pipeline Restart
Callie Fausey, 12/29/25

“Environmental groups filed an “emergency lawsuit” against the Trump administration late last week for taking back regulatory control of the Las Flores Pipeline System and rushing to approve Sable Offshore Corp’s restart plan for the pipeline,” the Santa Barbara Independent reports. “The state has repeatedly hindered the Houston-based oil company’s plans to restart the pipeline — the same one that caused a massive oil spill along the Gaviota Coast in 2015 — leading Sable to go over the heads of state regulators altogether and seek a bailout by the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)… “The Environmental Defense Center — which filed the lawsuit alongside the Center for Biological Diversity and their clients, including the Sierra Club and Santa Barbara Channelkeeper — said the administration’s approval ignores laws requiring environmental review and public input for such a decision. Filed in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the lawsuit names PHMSA, the Department of Transportation, and their heads — Paul Roberti for PHMSA and Sean Duffy, the secretary of the Department of Transportation — as defendants. “Rushing to restart this failed pipeline without following basic federal safety laws and without even making the necessary repairs poses an immediate threat to lives, property, and the environment across a large part of our state,” said EDC Chief Counsel Linda Krop. “We can’t allow the Trump administration and Sable to undermine California law and gamble with the safety of everyone living along the pipeline route.”

The Cool Down: Congressional delegation demands accountability after BP pipeline leak causes travel disruptions: ‘This malfunction jeopardized airline operations’
Susan Elizabeth Turek, 1/2/26

“A Congressional delegation is calling on BP to answer questions about a pipeline leak in the Pacific Northwest,” The Cool Down reports. “Washington lawmakers want answers after BP’s Olympic Pipeline — which runs 400 miles from Washington to Oregon and is the primary transporter of gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel in the region — leaked an estimated 2,300 gallons of fuel into Snohomish County’s water and soil. Unfortunately for travelers, the incident occurred just weeks before a busy Thanksgiving weekend. It disrupted flights at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, and many motorists expected to pay more at the gas pump… “While we are relieved that the pipeline is now operational, this malfunction jeopardized airline operations, farmlands, water safety, wildlife habitat, and public health,” the delegation wrote to BP North America CEO Murray Auchincloss. “Further, we are concerned because this spill is part of a decades-long history of spills and ruptures in the Olympic Pipeline.”

The Center Square: Constitution Pipeline revives application with federal regulators
Alton Wallace, 12/31/25

“Developers of the long-contested Constitution Pipeline have reactivated an application with federal regulators that could allow for the delivery of natural gas produced in Pennsylvania to power up to 3 million homes in New York and New England,” The Center Square reports. “The status of a state-level environmental permit remains unclear. Developers are seeking a waiver for a permit in New York, where the project has met resistance. Constitution, a subsidiary of Oklahoma-based Williams Companies, wants to build a 124-mile pipeline that would transport 650 million cubic feet natural gas per day produced in Pennsylvania’s Marcellus supply basin to a hub near Albany, New York… “In 2016, New York regulators determined Constitution had not adequately explored alternative routes that would have entirely avoided sensitive ecological areas… “Opponents, who want to lessen the region’s reliance on fossil fuels, have said the pipeline will affect pollution levels more than prices… “A separate pipeline supported by Trump received New York regulators’ approval in November. The Northeast Supply Enhancement pipeline, another Williams Companies project, had been rejected by New York environmental regulators three times before it was revived this spring following talks between Trump and Hochul.”

E&E News: Supreme Court books arguments in energy cases
Pamela King, 1/5/26

“The nation’s highest bench will hear arguments in late February over the continued operation of an oil pipeline in the Great Lakes and an energy giant’s fight over assets it lost during the Cuban Revolution,” E&E News reports. “With the support of the Trump administration behind them, lawyers for Exxon Mobil will appear before the Supreme Court on Feb. 23 to argue that the Cuban government did not properly compensate the oil company for $70 million (in 1960 dollars) of assets seized by Fidel Castro’s government… “On Feb. 24, the Supreme Court will consider a narrow, jurisdictional question in a broader legal battle that could decide the fate of the Line 5 oil pipeline in Michigan. At issue in Enbridge Energy v. Dana Nessel is whether a state or federal court should rule on Michigan’s decision to shutter Line 5 due to concerns about the risk of oil spills in the Great Lakes.”

Midland Reporter-Telegram: Energy Transfer weighs converting Permian NGL pipeline to gas, signaling Waha relief
Mella McEwen, 1/3/26

“Energy Transfer is considering converting a pipeline that moves natural gas liquids out of the Permian Basin to natural gas service amid weak NGL pricing and strong gas demand,” according to the Midland Reporter-Telegram. “If the company make the conversion, “The project would add to the industry bandwagon for new gas pipelines out of the Permian Basin,” according to East Daley Analytics. The company’s model forecasts more than 10 billion cubic feet per day of new Permian gas takeaway through 2030 from projects with a final investment decision, including several by Energy Transfer: The WhiteWater joint venture backing the Eiger Express Pipeline, which was recently upsized; WhiteWater’s Blackcomb; and Energy Transfer’s Hugh Brinson pipelines. These projects are scheduled to start through 2027, and the Eiger Express and Energy Transfer’s Desert Southwest will add more takeaway by the end of the decade.”

Alaska Beacon: Pipeline deal and disasters were highlight and low point of 2025, Alaska governor says
James Brooks, 12/29/25

“…Speaking to reporters before the open house, Dunleavy said the highlight of the year at a statewide level was the signing of a gas pipeline contract with developer Glenfarne,” the Alaska Beacon reports. “It started what I think is going to be a real pipeline,” Dunleavy said. “It’s something that the state has dreamed about for decades, ever since the trans-Alaska oil pipeline came into being.” Since January, when Glenfarne announced it was buying into the long-pursued Alaska LNG pipeline project, it’s announced a series of preliminary agreements from international companies interested in buying gas. To date, it doesn’t have firm deals for either buying or selling, and it is expected to make a go/no-go decision on the first phase of the project — a pipeline from the North Slope to Southcentral Alaska for in-state use — within the next month. “I think in January there’s going to be some major announcements that will solidify that this pipeline as a go,” Dunleavy said.

KABC: Significant land movement likely caused Castaic gas line break, SoCalGas says
12/30/25

“SoCalGas says a geologist has determined that significant land movement near a natural gas pipeline in Castaic likely caused it to rupture over the weekend, according to a preliminary investigation,” KABC reports. “Eyewitness News spotted the land movement in the area when the incident happened on Saturday… “Fire officials confirmed the leak came from a 34-inch transmission line — a major natural gas pipe that runs near the freeway. Officials explained that the pipe was under extreme pressure, and when it failed, the gas was released forcefully, kicking up dirt and debris, which was visible to drivers in the area… “Crews were able to isolate the damaged section of pipeline, stopping the leak later that night, but many people in nearby communities smelled the gas. First responders say there is no health risk in the area. Almost 15,000 homes were told to shelter in place for several hours.”

Fort Worth Star-Telegram: Oil spill’s environmental threat near Lake Arlington assessed by Texas biologist
Matthew Adams, 12/30/25

“The large oil spill that contaminated a Fort Worth water treatment plant near Lake Arlington last spring has not caused environmental damage to waterways or wildlife, a state biologist says,” the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports. “…In May, a damaged 16-inch pipe discharged 6,800 barrels of crude oil north of Lake Arlington near West Division Street. A portion of the more than 285,000 gallons of spilled oil entered a Fort Worth sewer line and ended up at the city’s Village Creek Water Treatment Plant, which sends treated effluent into the Trinity River. An Environmental Protection Agency report named Dallas-based Energy Transfer as being responsible for the pipeline. At the time of the incident, EPA investigators found crude oil in the treatment plant’s aeration basins, its final clarifier tanks and its fats, oils and greases handling facility. A subsequent report from the Railroad Commission of Texas, which regulates the oil and gas industry, said all the oil was recovered and none of it impacted inland or offshore waterways… “In a call with the Star-Telegram, Adam Whisenant, a Texas Parks and Wildlife Department biologist, confirmed there was no negative impact to nearby waterways. He said he visited the site in September and saw no immediate threat to fish or wildlife amid the ongoing cleanup.”

Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA): European gas pipeline companies report less than 1% of their emissions
12/22/25

“European gas pipeline companies refuse to report downstream emissions from the gas they transport, which average 150 times larger than the emissions they do report,” according to the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA). “Their reporting practice keeps these “transported emissions” off the books, creating potential for greenwashing and unpriced risk at the financial institutions that lend to and invest in them. This loophole has formed primarily because of a lack of clear guidance from standard-setter the Greenhouse Gas Protocol. Closing this loophole could add significant credibility to gas pipeline companies’ transition plans, financing frameworks and business strategies… “This “transported emissions” ambiguity means that investors may gain the false impression that these gas TSOs are low-carbon entities which are somehow separate from the fossil fuel value chain and its risks — when in fact they are its crucial “midstream” link. This creates potential for greenwashing and unpriced risk at the financial institutions that serve these gas pipeline companies, as these indirect emissions effectively remain off the books. “This fundamental flaw in climate accounting distorts the market by enabling gas pipeline companies to attract capital that might otherwise flow to greener investments,” said Arjun Flora, energy finance analyst at IEEFA and author of the report. “The broader risk is that this loophole ultimately delays the electrification of gas-consuming sectors and the transition away from fossil fuels.”

WASHINGTON UPDATES

E&E News: Progressives blame oil imperialism for Venezuela incursion
Manuel Quiñones, 1/5/26

“As lawmakers reacted to President Donald Trump’s decision to attack Venezuela and arrest its president, progressive Democrats said they knew what was to blame: the United States’ desire to control Venezuela’s vast oil reserves,” E&E News reports. “…The administration has been in touch with oil companies about investing in Venezuela. In exchange for new investments, the companies could see compensation for rigs, pipelines and other equipment lost when the country nationalized production, according to POLITICO… ”Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said, ‘Trump and his administration have often said they want to revive the Monroe Doctrine, claiming the United States has the right to dominate the affairs of the hemisphere. They have spoken openly about controlling Venezuela’s oil reserves, the largest in the world. This is rank imperialism.”

Reuters: Trump says US oil companies will spend billions in Venezuela
Arathy Somasekhar, Richard Valdmanis, Gram Slattery, Jarrett Renshaw and Liz Hampton, 1/3/26

“President Donald Trump said that American oil companies were prepared to enter Venezuela and invest to restore production in the South American country, an announcement that came just hours after Nicolás Maduro was captured and removed by U.S. forces,” Reuters reports. “We’re going to have our very large U.S. oil companies, the biggest anywhere in the world, go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, oil infrastructure, and start making money for the country,” Trump said on Saturday. While Chevron is the only American major with current operations in Venezuela, Exxon Mobil and ConocoPhillips, among others, have storied histories in the country. “We’re closely watching developments involving Venezuela, including the potential implications for global energy markets,” an API spokesperson told Reuters.”

Roll Call: Whitehouse says he’ll stall key bills over offshore wind pause
1/2/26

“At a press conference in his home state Friday, Senate Environment and Public Works ranking member Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., said he would stall updates to federal permitting, surface transportation reauthorization and the Water Resources Development Act until the Trump administration lifts its restrictions on offshore wind,” Roll Call reports. “…Let’s be very clear about what Trump is telling us with this latest action,’ Amo said. ‘What he’s telling us is that he doesn’t care for the offshore wind careers that workers have been training for. What he’s telling us is that the businesses that invested billions in securing our state’s energy future — that their investment was a waste — that permits and leases mean nothing, that really behaving illegally is the norm. And what he’s telling us is that grid reliability and low energy costs for Rhode Islanders struggling to keep the heat on this winter does not matter.”

Reuters: US sets new LNG export records in banner year marked by new capacity
Curtis Williams, 1/2/26

“The U.S. in 2025 became the first country to export more than 100 million metric tons (mmt) of liquefied natural gas in a single year, powered by the startup of production from new plants, preliminary data from LSEG showed,” Reuters reports. “The world’s largest LNG exporter sold 111 mmt of the fuel, almost 20 mmt more than its nearest rival Qatar and nearly 23 mmt more than it did last year, LSEG data showed. U.S. shipments accounted for roughly a quarter of global LNG exports last year… “Alex Munton, director of global gas and LNG at research firm Rapidan Energy Group, told Reuters the 24% year-on-year growth came down to high utilization across onstream terminals and a rapid ramp up at new facilities.”

STATE UPDATES

E&E News: Watchdog sues oil majors for gas price hike linked to California reg
Alex Nieves, 1/5/26

“What happened: Consumer Watchdog and two private law firms filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California last month, arguing that drivers overpaid for gasoline after fuel suppliers preemptively raised prices before updates to the state’s low-carbon fuel standard kicked in on July 1,” E&E News reports. “The move comes after the California Air Resources Board released data in July — first reported by POLITICO — that showed state gas prices had jumped roughly 5-8 cents per gallon starting in January, as companies began incorporating rules designed to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels into their pricing ahead of time. That resulted in consumers paying over $300 million in unnecessary charges, according to CARB’s calculations… “The lawsuit argues that the hike in gas prices before July 1 is part of a larger pattern of market manipulation in California. The complaint points to an October report from the state’s Division of Petroleum Market Oversight that found California drivers have faced a 41-cent surcharge that isn’t linked to California’s regulatory scheme or operating expenses, costing drivers roughly $59 billion between 2015 and 2024.”

Virginia Business: Dominion gas plant in Chesterfield on hold, while SCC considers petition
Kate Andrews, 12/23/25

“Dominion Energy’s proposed Chesterfield County natural gas plant is now on hold, as the Virginia State Corporation Commission is reconsidering its final order approving the project,” Virginia Business reports. “In a Dec. 15 decision, the SCC issued a brief ruling that it will consider a petition from opponents of the Chesterfield Energy Reliability Center (CERC) — Appalachian Voices, the NAACP and Mothers Out Front. This puts the project on hold for at least the time being, according to the ruling. The petition raises multiple issues, including possible health impacts of air pollution, higher costs for customers if the plant is built, and “disregards substantial proof that new gas is not required to meet Virginians’ energy needs,” according to a statement from the groups’ legal counsel, Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC)… “There is little doubt that Dominion’s need for additional generation assets is urgent,” the SCC’s Nov. 25 opinion said. “The near-term reliability concerns motivating the CERC project … cannot be addressed by non-carbon-emitting resources.” The project still could go forward, but the SCC’s new ruling, which follows the Dec. 15 submission of a petition for reconsideration, pauses the process. The three opposing groups and the SELC issued a statement, saying that they appreciate the SCC’s reconsideration. “We hope that the commission will see and acknowledge the unfairness of continuing to force particular communities to bear the brunt of pollution from fossil fuel infrastructure,” SELC Senior Attorney Grayson Holmes said.”

Louisiana Illuminator: State rejects Smitty’s Supply request to dispose of wastewater, storm runoff in drainage
Wesley Muller, 12/23/25

“State officials have denied a request from Smitty’s Supply Inc. to dispose of wastewater and stormwater from its disaster cleanup into drainage ditches that lead to the Tangipahoa River,” the Louisiana Illuminator reports. “The company submitted a short-term emergency general permit request Dec. 3 to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality asking for its permission to discharge up to 200,000 gallons of contaminated water per day for two months into the local drainage system. Over the two-month period, it would have allowed Smitty’s Supply to get rid of as much as 12 million gallons of potentially harmful stormwater that has pooled at the site and mixed with oil and chemicals… “The Department of Environmental Quality denied the Smitty’s Supply permit request Dec. 5, with records pointing out the collected stormwater was still too contaminated despite it being run through a commercial filtration and treatment process… “After crews collected the stormwater in temporary storage tanks, Smitty’s Supply hired a business to treat and filter the wastewater in an effort to make it clean enough to return to the environment, records show. However, when Smitty’s Supply had it tested, the recovered water was still too contaminated to be discharged, records show… “In a phone interview last week, LDEQ spokesman Greg Langley told the Illuminator the agency was initially unaware that Smitty’s Supply had plans to discharge its wash water along with the stormwater… “Some neighbors of the facility are urging state officials not to grant the company permission to release its wastewater into the drainage system. As of Monday, six residents filed written objections with the state to the company’s permit application even though the matter is not open for public comment… “Relying on the Tangipahoa River as a de facto disposal mechanism to ‘carry away’ hazardous compounds is fundamentally incompatible with the purpose, scope and legal constraints of a general permit,” Allen wrote in his objection letter.”

Fullerton Observer: Orange County Supervisors Foley and Sarmiento Oppose New Offshore Oil Drilling Plan
12/28/25

“Orange County Supervisor Katrina Foley has voiced her strong opposition to a proposed five-year plan that seeks to expand offshore oil drilling along California’s coast,” the Fullerton Observer reports. “…Foley announced plans to collaborate with Supervisor Sarmiento in sending an official letter of opposition to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management before the January 23, 2026 deadline. “Orange County families are unified: No new offshore drilling,” Foley stated. “Our community is defined by our pristine coastline, and oil rigs have no place here. The assertion that drilling will lower gas prices for local families is misleading; instead, it threatens to unravel our thriving $4 billion coastal tourism economy.” Foley criticized the federal proposal as “unnecessary and reckless,” arguing it undermines 40 years of environmental protections established during President Ronald Reagan’s administration. She emphasized the risks posed to Orange County’s environment and economy, underscoring that local communities bear the costs while transnational oil companies reap the profits. “Since the United States regained energy independence in 2020, there are over 1,800 offshore oil leases currently unused by major oil companies,” Foley pointed out.”

Carbon Herald: Kansas Steps Onto Carbon Capture Map With EPA Nod For Ethanol Project
Vasil Velev, 12/30/25

“The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has taken a significant step toward bringing carbon capture and storage to Kansas, tentatively approving a plan by ethanol producer PureField Ingredients to permanently store carbon dioxide beneath the state’s central plains,” the Carbon Herald reports. “The draft permit would allow a PureField subsidiary to inject up to 1.8 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into deep rock formations in Russell County over a 12-year period. The emissions would come from the company’s nearby ethanol facility and be transported by pipeline to a Class VI injection well drilled roughly 3,500 feet underground… “For PureField, the project is designed to lower the carbon intensity of its fuel, a key requirement for selling into premium markets such as California’s low-carbon fuel program. Federal tax incentives, including credits for carbon capture and clean fuel production, have become central to the economics of such projects.”

Texas Tribune: Indigenous groups fight to save rediscovered settlement site on Texas coast
Dylan Baddour, 12/23/25

“The rediscovery of an ancient settlement site, sandwiched between industrial complexes on Corpus Christi Bay, has spurred a campaign for its preservation by Native American groups in South Texas,” The Texas Tribune reports. “Hundreds of such sites were once documented around nearby bays but virtually all have been destroyed as cities, refineries and petrochemical plants spread along the waterfront at one of Texas’ commercial ports. In a letter last month, nonprofit lawyers representing the Karankawa and Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas asked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to revoke an unused permit that would authorize construction of an oil terminal at the site, called Donnel Point, among the last undisturbed tracts of land on almost 70 miles of shoreline. “We’re not just talking about a geographical point on the map,” Love Sanchez, a 43-year-old mother of two and a Karankawa descendent in Corpus Christi, told the Tribune. “We’re talking about a place that holds memory.” “…She formed a group called Indigenous Peoples of the Coastal Bend in 2018 to raise awareness about the unacknowledged Indigenous heritage of this region on the middle Texas coast. The names and tales of her ancestors here were lost to genocide in Texas. Monuments now say her people went extinct. But the family lore, earthy skin tones and black, waxy hair of many South Texas families attest that Indigenous bloodlines survived. For their descendents, few sites like Donnel Point remain as evidence of how deep their roots here run… “Nye and Moore took their findings to local Indigenous groups, who quietly began planning a campaign for preservation… “The destruction of these sites furthers the erasure of Indigenous people from Texas, he told the Tribune. He has fought for years against the planned destruction of another village site called Garcia Pasture, which is slated to become an LNG terminal at the Port of Brownsville, south of Corpus Christi. North of Corpus Christi, near Victoria, a large, 7,000-year-old cemetery was exhumed in 2006 for a canal expansion at a plastics plant. “The petrochemical industry has to understand that we’re going to stand in the way of their so-called progress,” Mancias, a 71-year-old former youth social worker, said during the webinar. “They have total disregard for the land because they have no connection. They’re immigrants.”

Kent County News: Decades after hospital oil spill, state closes case
Hannah Combs, 12/28/25

“Maryland environmental officials have closed a decades-long case involving one of the largest oil spills in state history, but the state is retaining its right to take future enforcement action and has yet to issue full compliance certification for the former Chester River Hospital Center site,” Kent County News reports. “Chestertown Mayor David Foster, who has monitored the case for decades, told the town council he remains concerned about ending monitoring while trace amounts of petroleum persist in groundwater. The Maryland Department of the Environment’s Oil Control Program issued a final closure letter Nov. 25 for the case involving an estimated 100,000 to 170,000 gallons of heating oil that leaked from underground storage tanks discovered failing in 1987… “Notably, the Dept. of the Environment based its closure decision on “current land use” — the property’s commercial designation — and stated that “future excavation in the area of investigation may create exposure pathways to the existing petroleum-related contamination that may impact human health or the environment.”

EXTRACTION

U.S. Dept. of Energy: Project Selections for FOA 3365: Carbon Capture, Removal, and Conversion Test Centers
1/2/25

“The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois (Urbana, Illinois) intends to develop the conceptual design, business, technical and managerial structures for an internationally recognized test center to evaluate and accelerate carbon capture, removal and conversion technologies under relevant industrial operating conditions for carbon dioxide (CO2) management in the cement industry… “Cement Carbon Management Innovation Center — Holcim US (Chicago, Illinois) plans to establish a domestic Cement Carbon Management Innovation Center at its Hagerstown Cement Facility in Maryland. The selected effort represents a Phase 1 project to explore the feasibility of the potential testing center location, ownership structure, business model and technology partners… “National Carbon Capture Center — Southern Company Services, Inc. (Birmingham, Alabama) intends to maintain and operate the National Carbon Capture Center (NCCC), which is a comprehensive test facility capable of evaluating CO2 capture, removal, and conversion technologies under electric generating plant operating conditions… “Carbon Capture Test Center Capital Improvement — University of North Dakota Energy & Environmental Research Center (Grand Forks, North Dakota) plans to enhance its existing CO2 capture, removal and conversion test center to rapidly and cost-effectively test a greater variety of technologies and evaluate the technical efficacy of advanced systems with data generated under relevant power plant operating conditions… “Wyoming Integrated Test Center Enhancement — University of Wyoming (Laramie, Wyoming) plans to expand the existing Wyoming Integrated Test Center’s (ITC) capabilities by accommodating a wider range of carbon management technologies.”

CLIMATE FINANCE

Bangor Daily News: Why Maine didn’t come close to meeting a 2026 deadline to divest from fossil fuels
Michael Shepherd, 1/4/26

“Nearly five years ago, Maine passed a first-in-the-nation law requiring the state pension system to divest from fossil fuels. Thursday was the deadline to do it,” the Bangor Daily News reports. “Yet roughly $1.15 billion was still invested in the sector as of December. It has long been clear that the Maine Public Employees Retirement System wasn’t going to meet the deadline. The agency has cited a part of the law that requires it to divest while meeting its “fiduciary obligations” to current and future retirees. The state’s interpretation has been criticized by climate groups. The episode shows the slow progress of a law hailed by progressive activists when Gov. Janet Mills signed it into law in 2021. Its effect on the pension system that serves nearly 1 in 13 Mainers has been muted. “The law requires the system to divest, and they have not taken meaningful action,” former state Rep. Maggie O’Neil, D-Saco, who sponsored the law, told the News… “Getting out of fossil fuels at once would be costly, the agency argues. For example, roughly $600 million in investments in the sector are spread between $2.9 million in partnerships. Maine would likely have to sell out of those funds at a discount of $400 million, the report says. The state has investments in Exxon-Mobil and companies that operate in both fossil fuel and renewables… “The Maine Public Employees Retirement System is following the attorney general’s advice, CEO Rebecca Wyke noted in an email. The independent state agency stood by its passive strategy to reduce fossil fuel investments after a protest by climate activists last summer.”

OPINION

The Alpena News: The Straits of Mackinaw polluted with politics
Greg Awtry, 1/2/26

“When an industry or corporation is allowed to go unchallenged while trampling state rights and responsibilities, decisions often become political, not scientific, which could and will put people and natural resources in danger. That’s the conclusion of many who recently read about a federal judge who ruled that the State of Michigan no longer has the authority to regulate the safety of its own water, in regards to Enbridge’s controversial Line 5 oil pipeline,” Greg Awtry writes for The Alpena News. “As you know, Enbridge wants to build a twenty-foot wide tunnel under the Straits of Mackinaw so they can keep their 72 year-old pipeline pumping Canadian oil to Sarnia, Ontario to supply fuel for eastern Canada. The state of Michigan is fighting this with all their might, desperately trying to protect and preserve the Great Lakes for generations to come… “It gets worse. If Enbridge does build this dangerous tunnel, it plans to give it back to the State of Michigan when it’s completed. You might think, well, that’s nice. Does it then become the responsibility of Michigan to maintain the tunnel they didn’t want? How about the liability? If Michigan now owns it and an explosion or significant rupture were to happen, Enbridge can say, well, we don’t own it, you do. You fix it… “It gets worse. Hidden in the depths of Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill, not only did the federal health insurance subsidies expire in 2025, so does the 9-cents per barrel Oil Spill and Liability Trust Fund tax. For decades the oil industry was required to pay 9-cents per barrel into the fund to be used to clean up the hundreds of oil spills that happen each year. Now Trump gives this tax break of hundreds of millions of dollars to the oil companies who will no longer contribute to the cleanup costs. Who is in bed with who? The answer is crystal clear… “Folks, this crap has to stop. Hey, I know we need oil. I also know we need water, and will need it long after the oil supplies are long gone. But let’s be smart about it. Let the people and the states have a say in what is safe or not.”

Bleeding Heartland: Public interests and property rights: The pipeline looms for Iowa lawmakers
Dr. Emily Boevers is a Readlyn farm kid, mother of three, and physician practicing in Iowa, 1/2/26

“…Eminent domain allows the non-consensual taking of private land so long as landowners are justly compensated and public good is served,” Dr. Emily Boevers writes for Bleeding Heartland. “It is likely through enforcement of eminent domain that the carbon-capture pipeline will ultimately wind its way through Iowa… “Since the Summit Carbon Solutions CO2 pipeline was proposed, Iowans have voiced their opposition to using eminent domain to seize private property for that purpose. A 2023 poll showed a whopping 78 percent of Iowans opposed using eminent domain laws for carbon-capture pipelines. As a result, whether or not the profits and business purposes of the private company meet the public use threshold has been hotly debated… “Now, the same elected officials will have another opportunity to decide: Will individual property rights rule? Will the corporate pipeline forge ahead? Will any of this resuscitate our failing state economy?… “If Summit Carbon is granted the legal authority to use private property for their business interests, the message will be loud and clear: Iowa is for sale, and we need only look at the campaign contributions to see who sold it. If the state allows a corporate pipeline to run through family farmlands, who will bear the legal responsibility for upkeep and stewardship? If a pipeline leaks in 20 years, who will enforce clean up and reparations? If Iowa’s contamination, cancer and healthcare crisis spirals further out of control—who will step up to make the decisions that favor everyday Iowans? These are not academic questions: they have a real and immediate policy impact.”

Cleveland.com: Carbon capture and storage bill will put Ohio communities at risk
Randi Pokladnik, Ph.D., is a board member of Ohio Valley Environmental Advocates. She writes from Uhrichsville, 1/2/26

“According to section 1509.72 of proposed Senate Bill 136, Ohio’s Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) Division of Oil and Gas Resources ​would have “sole and exclusive authority to regulate carbon sequestration and the operation of storage facilities in the state.” Like West Virginia, Ohio would gain primacy (primary authority) from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s Underground Injection Control Department, which currently regulates Class VI carbon injection storage wells,” Randi Pokladnik writes for Cleveland.com. “…Ohio’s Real Estate Disclosure Laws require a home seller to disclose anything that could be “dangerous to occupants.” How will storing CO2 at supercritical pressures of 1,000 pounds per square inch (psi) under private property affect one’s ability to sell their home, obtain insurance, and enter into future oil and gas leases? There are no Class VI CO2 storage wells in operation in Ohio; no industries or power plants retrofitted to capture CO2; and no pipelines to transport 1000 psi CO2. Granting primacy to the ODNR for CO2 wells is especially worrisome, given the current lawsuit filed against ODNR’s permitting process of Class II oil and gas brine injection wells near Marietta. Residents are concerned that brine wells, proposed less than two miles from the city’s drinking water source, could pollute their water… “SB 136, if enacted, will put Ohio communities and residents at risk.”

Santa Barbara Independent: California Should Determine if Pipeline Is Safe to Operate
Victoria Riskin is the founder of Bluedot Living, a multiplatform media company delivering stories in print and digital that focus on healthy living, sustainability and climate solutions, 12/30/25

“For Santa Barbara, the oil pipeline debate is not new. It comes with hard-earned lessons shaped by decades of oil development in the Santa Barbara Channel, a catastrophic spill in 2015, and repeated efforts by the community to ensure that the risks of offshore oil production are not shifted onto the citizens and our community,” Victoria Riskin writes for the Santa Barbara Independent. “The pipeline system runs from the Las Flores Canyon processing facilities on the Gaviota Coast inland to California facilities for processing 120 miles away in Kern County. It does not cross state lines. It never has. Now the federal government, once happy to offload the project to state jurisdiction, has swept in to claim the pipeline is “interstate” and hand over the operation to the underfunded company, Sable Offshore. We all remember May 2015, that same pipeline system failed and ruptured near Refugio State Beach, releasing oil that flowed into creeks, reached the ocean, and spread along 150 miles of coastline. Beaches closed. Wildlife was harmed. Tourism and local livelihoods suffered. The spill left a permanent scar on the community’s memory. Tyler Hayden and Nick Welsh of the Santa Barbara Independent have written brilliantly about that history… “Californians understand that the energy transition will take time. But reviving old, high-risk infrastructure — while overriding state authority, weakening county safety laws, allowing multinational corporations to shed liability, and re-labeling reality for regulatory convenience — is not a responsible transition. Shifting the definition does not make the pipeline safer. It only makes it easier for powerful actors to distance themselves from responsibility and for President Trump to take a victory lap over Governor Newsom and Californians. Santa Barbara deserves better. California deserves better.”

San Luis Obispo Tribune: California coastal communities threatened by federal calls to drill
Haley Ehlers is the executive director of Climate First: Replacing Oil & Gas, 1/2/26

“California’s Central Coast is under attack from Big Oil and the federal government amid calls to increase drilling along the beautiful coastline we call home,” Haley Ehlers writes for the San Luis Obispo Tribune. “As lawmakers return from recess for the new legislative session in January, Central Californians will be waiting for them to take a stance against President Donald Trump’s “Drill Baby Drill” agenda. The Central Coast has seen a blitz of recent oil spills in our waterways and a false-positive water contamination scare that sent communities spiraling. In November, over 400 gallons of crude oil mixture was found leaking into a creek that feeds Ventura County’s Santa Clara River, followed by another oil leak found in a storm drain, and a third 4,000 gallon oil spill in Monterey County. Intense fear for health and safety consumed Central Coast residents, who have experienced health-threatening oil spills and suffered from actual water contamination last year, causing households to mandatorily evacuate their homes. While our communities suffer from ongoing spills that threaten our public health, Trump is making federal calls to increase drilling along the Central Coast and re-open offshore drilling, undoing years of climate progress and protections… “Opening up our federal lands to increased oil drilling will worsen our climate, damage our public land and hurt community health. Local governments like Santa Barbara County, Los Angeles City and Culver City are passing ordinances to phase out gas and oil drilling. But our communities need the backing of climate champions at the state level who will prioritize the health and protection of the Central Coast. For lawmakers, this means supporting existing climate policy and introducing new protections as needed.”