EXTRACTED: Daily News Clips 10/30/26

PIPELINE NEWS

• Canadian Press: Liberals keep B.C. oil tanker ban in place, vote down Conservative bill

• Chatham Journal: Murdock and Reives urge DWR to deny 401 certification for Enbridge Chatham County project

• New England News Collab: Public seeking answers about new Cape Cod gas pipeline

• KCWI: Politics of a Pipeline [VIDEO]

• Scarsdale10583: Gas Pipeline Inspectors Sentenced for Fabricating Test Results

WASHINGTON UPDATES

• Press Release: 140+ Groups Urge Congress to Reject ‘Project Certainty’ in Permitting Bill

• Politico: Trouble at Home

• Inside EPA: Backers Seek Over a Dozen Senate Democrats To Support Permitting Bill

• Politico: Permitting backers want Senate to rack up vote count to send message to the House

• Inside Climate News: As Permitting Bill Debate Approaches, Senators Have Fresh Doubts and an Ultimatum

• Axios: Key Democrat warns permitting bill could create “gold rush for gas”

• Bloomberg: Permitting Bill Opens Rift Between Green Groups, Senate Allies

• Punchbowl News: White House energy council pushes permitting to stakeholders

• Bloomberg: Wind Projects Become Bargaining Chip in Trump’s Permitting Push

• Press Release: Pacific Legal Foundation leads more than 35 coalition partners urging Congress to advance permitting deal

• Press Release: Karuk Tribe Condemns Senate’s Assault On Tribal Sovereignty And Sacred Places

• National Review: Democrats Reached a Deal with Republicans to Lower Energy Costs. Rashida Tlaib Is Trying to Kill It

• Heatmap: Why Permitting Reform Is a Historic Victory Over Utilities

• Washington Sun: Senate Democrats Demand Answers on Plans to Use Public Land Use for Data Centers

• Politico: Big Oil, Big Payday

STATE UPDATES

• 1012 Industry Report: Community pushback and regulatory uncertainty are giving pause to players in the CCS space

• Politico: Judge casts doubt on challenges to ANWR oil drilling

• Wisconsin Public Radio: Owners pull the plug on proposed $1B natural gas plant in northern Wisconsin

• Taxpayers for Common Sense: North Dakota’s Federal Oil and Gas Leasing, and What It Has Cost Taxpayers

• Smart Cities Dive: Data centers on more than 3 dozen local ballots

EXTRACTION

• Pro Publica: How a Secret Vote by U.N. Scientists Legitimized Carbon Capture and Skewed Decades of Climate Policy

• Press release: IPCC Invites Experts to Review Draft Methodology Report on Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies, Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage

• Bioengineer.org: Tracking CO2 Underground: A Review Maps Real-Time Monitoring for Carbon Storage

• Bloomberg: New US Data Centers Projected to Emit More Carbon Than All of Mexico

• Reuters: Shell and Total post highest quarterly profit since 2022

• Latitude Media: The cracks in the AI race for onsite gas power

• Carbon Herald: Canada Falling Further Behind On 2030 Climate Target, Auditor General Says

• Bloomberg: Health Damages From Climate Change Are Increasing Faster

• DeSmog: ‘Snipped And Posted’: How Pro-Oil Groups Generate Viral Content Online

• Reuters: How could the oil spill off the UAE coast affect desalination plants?

OPINION

• Earthjustice: What Will BAAJA Do? Whatever the Trump Administration Wants

• The Crucial Years: The President is Equal Parts Moron and Monster

• OilPrice.com: The CCS Project That Passed Every Test Except the Investment Test
  

PIPELINE NEWS

Canadian Press: Liberals keep B.C. oil tanker ban in place, vote down Conservative bill
Nick Murray, 10/28/26

“The Liberal government voted to keep the B.C. coastal oil tanker ban in place Wednesday, defeating a Conservative bill that would have repealed it,” the Canadian Press reports. “MPs voted along party lines during second reading in the House of Commons Wednesday, with only the Conservatives voting to move the bill forward to the committee stage… “Prime Minister Mark Carney — who struck a deal with the B.C. government earlier this summer to keep the ban in place — made a rare appearance after question period Wednesday to vote in person on several bills, including C-264. Shortly after making the tanker ban deal with B.C., Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced the route for the proposed oil pipeline to the West Coast will go south to respect the tanker ban. Smith, who originally envisioned the pipeline going north, backed the Conservative bill to repeal the ban. “Canada cannot become a global energy superpower while federal policies continue to stand in the way of getting our energy to the world. Repealing the tanker ban is an important step toward securing better prices for our resources and building a stronger, more prosperous Canada,” Smith said in a media statement.”

Chatham Journal: Murdock and Reives urge DWR to deny 401 certification for Enbridge Chatham County project
10/29/26

“Senator Natalie Murdock (SD–20) and Representative Robert T. Reives II (HD–54) sent a joint letter to request that the Division of Water Resources (DWR) at the NC Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) deny the Section 401 water quality certification for the Enbridge Gas North Carolina Chatham County System Expansion Project, based on substantial concerns regarding compliance with applicable State water quality standards and other requirements governing the Section 401 certification,” the Chatham Journal reports. “The three major concerns regarding water quality standards include: Altered Surface Runoff; Groundwater and Well Water Contamination; Erosion and Sedimentation. Another major concern is the permanent negative impacts to the Cape Fear Shiner and other endangered species… “A subsequent letter was jointly sent to the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) requesting that it prepare a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before making any decision on the proposed Section 404 permit for the Chatham County System Expansion Project.”

New England News Collab: Public seeking answers about new Cape Cod gas pipeline
Jennette Barnes, 10/29/26

“Could a new natural gas pipeline to Cape Cod mean a future increase in gas consumption on the Cape?,” New England News Collab reports. “Members of the Cape Cod Commission and the public tried to pin down an answer to that question Wednesday, as a commission subcommittee held its first hearing on the project to replace the pipelines under the Bourne and Sagamore bridges with a single line drilled under the Cape Cod Canal. Critics claim the larger-diameter pipe could carry more gas than the two old pipes combined — double the volume, Sierra Club Massachusetts says — if pipeline owner Algonquin Gas Transmission were to receive federal approval for more flow and if National Grid’s downstream distribution system were expanded to handle it. The Sierra Club and other detractors say burning more gas on Cape Cod flies in the face of goals to reduce communities’ carbon footprint, including goals in the commission’s own Regional Policy Plan. Liz Argo of the Yarmouth Select Board said the town wants to protect the character of the Cape. She told NENC the increase in the size of the pipe makes the town nervous, and Yarmouth wants to make sure the line will not carry more gas… “But the commission does not have the authority to limit the volume of gas in the pipeline, Jordan Velozo, chief regulatory officer for the Cape Cod Commission, told NENC. That authority rests with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.”

KCWI: Politics of a Pipeline [VIDEO]
10/22/26

“For the past five years, Iowa and surrounding states have been at the center of a controversial and sometimes heated legislative battle,” KCWI reports.

Scarsdale10583: Gas Pipeline Inspectors Sentenced for Fabricating Test Results
Joanne Wallenstein, 10/29/26

“An inspector, hired by Con Edison to do safety inspections of gas pipelines in the Bronx and Westchester have been sentenced for fabricating the test results,” Scarsdale10583 reports. “Between 2016-2023 Michael Vasconcellos and Liam Treibert were hired to perform safety inspections on hundreds of welds in the pipeline but never performed the work. Instead, the indictment says they used “radaring,” which typically involved “radiographing the same weld twice and then passing off one copy of films as having come from a second weld… “Vasconcellos was sentenced to 30 months in prison, three years of supervised release and ordered to pay over $64 million in restitution to Con Edison… “However, Con Edison announced that it would dig up the pipeline in 40 sites for inspections, due to “fraudulent reporting.” “…When and if gas flows through the pipeline, any defective welds would pose a serious risk for leaks or explosions.”

WASHINGTON UPDATES

Press Release: 140+ Groups Urge Congress to Reject ‘Project Certainty’ in Permitting Bill
10/28/26

“More than 140 environmental groups warned members of Congress today about the potentially catastrophic consequences of the ‘project certainty’ provisions in the so-called Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026… “Today’s letter urges Congress to reject the vague and overbroad language in the bill prohibiting agencies from taking any actions that ‘interfere’ with ‘operation at full capacity.’ This language could gut any federal agencies’ abilities to take routine actions, including routine enforcement, to protect people and the environment because the bill does not define what it means for an agency to interfere with a project… “Project certainty is the Death Star that will leave the EPA and many other federal agencies virtually powerless for the next president,” said Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “Permitting bill proponents have been so fixated on Trump’s war on offshore wind that they didn’t even consider how their deal will harm the next president’s ability to govern. The fossil fuel industry and tech oligarchs must be salivating over these provisions. Project certainty will accomplish what Elon Musk and DOGE never dreamed possible — the full evisceration of the EPA’s power.”

Politico: Trouble at Home
Nico Portuondo, 10/29/26

“Sen. Martin Heinrich’s (D-NM) home state headache over his permitting reform bill is worsening,” Politico reports. “Several New Mexico Democrats have expressed opposition to the bill S.5653 (119), in its current form over its changes to the tribal consultation process for energy projects. Now, another Democrat is joining that list: New Mexico gubernatorial candidate and former Biden administration Interior Secretary Deb Haaland. “I do not support S.5653 as currently written,” Haaland told Politico. “Tribal Nations in New Mexico and across the country have warned the bill excludes Tribes from consultation in the process and weakens their ability to protect culturally significant sites. I agree with them.”

Inside EPA: Backers Seek Over a Dozen Senate Democrats To Support Permitting Bill
10/29/26

“Supporters of the pending Senate permit bill are acknowledging they may not get the support of most Senate Democrats for the package, in part due to sharp criticism from many environmentalists and tribal groups, though they are seeking sufficient backing to counter any Republican opposition and signal enough House lawmakers to support it,” Inside EPA reports. “We are pushing for 15 to 20 Democrats on the Senate side supporting this legislation,” one proponent of the draft permitting package told Inside EPA. “I think there will be some losses on the Republican side, but we also want to send a clear signal to [Democrats] on the House side that there is broad support for the legislation.” The goal underscores a possible path forward for the measure even as four key Senate Democrats recently amplified misgivings about whether the Trump administration would fairly implement the legislation, with those lawmakers specifically urging the Department of Energy as a sign of good faith to restore terminated clean energy grants.”

Politico: Permitting backers want Senate to rack up vote count to send message to the House
Pavan Acharya, Nico Portuondo, James Bikales and Ben Lefebvre, 10/29/26

“Backers of the Senate’s sweeping permitting bill are setting a high target for its performance in its first vote — a bar that could depend on painstaking negotiations involving tribal politics and constraints on the White House’s power to kill energy projects,” Politico reports. “Proponents of the bill see racking up at least 70 supporters in the Senate as key to motivating quick passage in the House, where there have been considerably more vocal detractors of the text — especially on the Democratic side of the aisle, where concerns are mounting over its potential impacts on tribal consultations related to energy projects… “Right now, rank-and-file Senate Democrats are asking for adjustments to the bill’s changes to the National Historic Preservation Act, two people familiar with the negotiations said. Native tribe representatives and some Democrats criticize those changes as blocking tribal consultations on projects proposed in their communities… “The lobbyist also told Politico the staff of rank-and-file members are interested in adjustments to the executive certainty language of the bill. There are fears that the language negotiated by Democrats to protect clean energy projects would actually end up benefiting and locking in fossil fuel projects instead.”

Inside Climate News: As Permitting Bill Debate Approaches, Senators Have Fresh Doubts and an Ultimatum
Dan Gearino, 10/29/26

“…As the date nears, some of the country’s leading environmental groups are ramping up their opposition, arguing that the measure would do more harm than good,” Inside Climate News reports. “A new report from Resources for the Future, a research nonprofit, projects that the bill’s power-sector provisions would cut carbon emissions by 1.8 gigatons by 2041 and reduce annual electricity-system costs by an average of 3.5 percent to 7 percent compared to a scenario without the bill… “On the other side, key environmental advocacy groups say the proposal would speed up fossil fuel infrastructure buildout and remove current tools to oppose projects… “The same day, four Senate Democrats sent a letter to the bill’s co-sponsors saying they have concerns that President Donald Trump’s administration cannot be trusted to follow through on promises that were made during negotiations… “If the administration doesn’t comply, the senators have threatened to oppose a motion to proceed to debate on the bill at a vote scheduled for Nov. 9. Losing the support of four senators who have been vocal advocates for environmental protection could make it harder to secure the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.”

Axios: Key Democrat warns permitting bill could create “gold rush for gas”
Amy Harder, 10/30/26

“A bipartisan deal to speed energy development is facing concerns it could favor natural gas over renewables because of President Trump’s opposition to wind and solar,” Axios reports. “The worries from Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) could complicate efforts to pass the bill before year’s end, highlighting divisions even among Democrats who have long supported permitting reform. Casten, a former energy executive and leading Democratic voice on permitting reform, told Axios he isn’t yet backing the bill and is negotiating changes with Senate Democrats to prevent it from disproportionately benefiting natural gas… “Casten argues that as Trump’s second term becomes part of that historical benchmark, the administration’s treatment of renewable energy could effectively become the new normal… “I think the structure of the bill is good,” he told Axios. “I think there are modest changes we could make to it to make sure it works and doesn’t sort of create like a gold rush for gas.”

Bloomberg: Permitting Bill Opens Rift Between Green Groups, Senate Allies
Kellie Lunney, 10/28/26

“Senate Democrats with sterling environmental credentials are betraying those values by supporting a bipartisan permitting overhaul bill, a coalition of 140 climate, environmental justice, and conservation groups said Wednesday,” Bloomberg reports. “Language in the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act aiming to give all energy projects a fair shake without political interference will have the opposite effect, preventing future administrations from being able “to unwind the harm caused by the Trump administration’s fossil fuel agenda,” the groups wrote in a letter to Democratic senators, and addressed specifically to Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.).”

Punchbowl News: White House energy council pushes permitting to stakeholders
10/29/26

“The Trump administration’s National Energy Dominance Council hosted a meeting this afternoon with supportive industry representatives across the energy sector to strategize over passing the permitting reform bill, a White House official told us,” Punchbowl News reports.

Bloomberg: Wind Projects Become Bargaining Chip in Trump’s Permitting Push
Mark Chediak, Jennifer A Dlouhy, and Ari Natter, 10/28/26

“… But then the Trump administration asked federal courts to let the government reconsider three offshore wind projects authorized under President Joe Biden, preserving an option to potentially void the approvals later,” Bloomberg reports. “More recently, in what officials cast as a goodwill gesture, the Pentagon started clearing some onshore wind farms from a national security review that had stalled hundreds of ventures this year. Just this week, the administration allowed five developments to advance, with two being approved on Wednesday, a White House official told Bloomberg.”

Press Release: Pacific Legal Foundation leads more than 35 coalition partners urging Congress to advance permitting deal
10/28/26

“Pacific Legal Foundation is joined by more than 35 coalition partners in urging congressional leaders to pass the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026 (BAAJA), a bipartisan deal to overhaul federal permitting and remove barriers to building in America… “The bipartisan deal, released last month, would streamline reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), shorten deadlines for legal challenges, and reform judicial remedies to provide greater certainty for projects. It also would reform permitting under the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act… ““Americans should not have to spend years navigating government red tape to build the projects their communities depend on,” said Joe Luppino-Esposito, federal policy director at Pacific Legal Foundation. “This coalition urges Congress to seize this bipartisan opportunity to enact meaningful permitting reform. Giving people the freedom to build will help lower costs, expand opportunity, and strengthen our economy.”

Press Release: Karuk Tribe Condemns Senate’s Assault On Tribal Sovereignty And Sacred Places
10/28/26

“The Karuk Tribe is calling on Democratic Sens. Martin Heinrich and Sheldon Whitehouse to withdraw support for a bipartisan energy bill that would weaken protections for Tribal sacred places, diminish Tribal authority in federal decision-making and restrict the ability of Tribal Nations to stop unlawful projects. S. 5653, the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026, pairs energy and transmission provisions with sweeping changes to environmental and historic preservation laws. Its proposed changes to the National Historic Preservation Act have drawn opposition from Tribal Nations and Tribal organizations warning that the legislation would undermine tribal sovereignty and the federal government’s responsibilities to Tribal Nations.”

National Review: Democrats Reached a Deal with Republicans to Lower Energy Costs. Rashida Tlaib Is Trying to Kill It
Eva Terry, 10/28/26

“…However, in a Zoom press conference on Wednesday morning, Representative Rashida Tlaib urged listeners to oppose the bill,” National Review reports. “We know the bill is 417 pages of empty promises,” Tlaib said. She then referenced the complexities of federal permitting… “Meanwhile, Tlaib criticized the four senators for allegedly taking input from the energy industry. “This is corporate money in politics, corrupting our democracy,” she said. Erik Schlenker-Goodrich, the executive director of the Western Environmental Law Center, joined her in this criticism. He said he opposes the bill since it takes power from future political leaders and gives it to the markets. Such a move would make it difficult for future presidents to impose green, low-carbon requirements for energy developers in the U.S., he said… “Beyond making it harder for presidents to impose environmental mandates on the private industry, Schlenker-Goodrich said he opposes the bill because it would make environmental litigation more difficult… “When Democrats get the gavel, I hope you understand that doesn’t mean we’re safer,” she said. “I’m sad to say that we’re going to have to make sure that as they are trying to repeal all the bad things that Trump has done, that they also include this.”

Heatmap: Why Permitting Reform Is a Historic Victory Over Utilities
Robinson Meyer, 10/9/26

“Climate and environmental advocates are sharply divided over the Senate’s bipartisan permitting reform proposal. But what most people agree is that the bill’s changes to electricity and transmission law are really, really good — and in some sense are much better than expected,” Heatmap reports. “…On the one hand, unfortunately for ratepayers and customers, I don’t see investors and utilities having, like, a sudden change of heart and doing the things that they could and should do to arrest inflation and lower people’s bills. I do want to make it clear, like, they could do that. There are a lot of things that utilities could do if they weren’t looking at their next quarterly returns and just sort of maxing cap-ex, to bring people’s bills down. Like, you could see that on the public side of the sector. I don’t think they will. I think their incentives are too perverse. And because of that, I think they’re going to keep getting themselves into trouble politically by going for rate increases and bill increases… “I think one thing doing this work has taught me is that these companies have been around for over 100 years. If you read some of the history on some of the big political fights that investors and utilities were having in the 1930s, they do the exact same things now. They spent on propaganda. They route their money through trade associations. They recruit other parts of the political economy, like labor, to back them with politicians for whom that constituency is important. This is something EPI has really tried to investigate and highlight and ultimately address — they have, at the end of the day, a publicly subsidized pool of ratepayer money to spend on politics that almost no other industry has. And so I think they will regroup. Counting them out is probably a mistake.”

Washington Sun: Senate Democrats Demand Answers on Plans to Use Public Land Use for Data Centers
Mara Hoplamazian, 10/29/26

“Senate Democrats are asking Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to cease efforts to build data centers on public lands in light of The Washington Sun’s reporting that revealed the extent of the development the Trump administration is considering,” the Washington Sun reports. “Sens. Ron Wyden (Oregon), Jeff Merkley (Oregon) and Alex Padilla (California) wrote in a letter to Burgum that the “complete lack of transparency” over his meetings with data center developers and investors over the past year and a half is compounding their concerns… “The senators also wrote that they had concerns over “numerous risks posed to communities” by data centers, including water use that could exacerbate drought conditions in the West… “Kate Groetzinger, communications manager at the Center for Western Priorities, has surfaced concerns that the Bureau of Land Management has not established a legal basis for allowing data centers on public lands, as they have done with technologies like wind and solar. Instead, BLM would have to rely on a provision that allows for facilities that are “necessary” and “in the public interests” to be on public lands. “Whether AI data centers serve the ‘public interest’ is an open question—but poll after poll suggests that Americans think they do not,” she wrote.”

Politico: Big Oil, Big Payday
Benjamin Storrow, 10/29/26

“The world’s largest oil companies are raking it in, as higher prices push up their profits,” Politico reports. “Shell reported third-quarter profits of $12.1 billion on Thursday, up from $5.3 billion the same time a year ago. TotalEnergies reported profits of $8.2 billion compared to about $3.7 billion last year. On Wednesday, Equinor reported operating income of $12.4 billion, roughly double what it was this time last year. The windfall could fan the political debate over affordability on both sides of the Atlantic. The high price of crude, along with refined products like diesel and gasoline, have become major headwinds for incumbents seeking to assuage voters’ concerns over costs… “Companies are increasingly pouring money into oil and gas development outside the Middle East, confirming the predictions of industry analysts. For instance, Equinor announced earlier this month that Shell had taken a 30% stake in its Bay du Nord project off the eastern coast of Canada.”

STATE UPDATES

1012 Industry Report: Community pushback and regulatory uncertainty are giving pause to players in the CCS space
Sam Barnes, 10/29/26

“The back-to-back cancellations of two Louisiana mega projects last summer provided a stark warning that growing community resistance is having a very real impact on industrial investments with a carbon sequestration component,” according to 1012 Industry Report. “Air Products announced in June that it was abandoning its $4.5 billion Louisiana Clean Energy project in Ascension Parish, and in the same month SunGas Renewables cancelled its $2.5 billion Beaver Lake Renewable Energy methanol facility near Alexandria. Both investments had endured protracted battles with area residents over their carbon capture plans. Greg Upton, associate professor-research, LSU Energy Institute, told the Report the regulatory uncertainty around Class VI well permits and growing community resistance likely played big roles in the decisions. “These industrial companies need buyers that want a lower carbon product,” Upton told the Report, “but if they don’t have a viable path for getting a Class VI permit it becomes harder to find customers willing to sign a contract due to the uncertainty.” Upton expects to see a decline in the numbers of projects featuring a carbon capture component in his Gulf Coast Energy Outlook due out this fall—despite the Section 45Q federal tax credit remaining in effect until Jan. 1, 2033. “…Eric Smith, associate director of the Tulane Energy Institute, told the Report much of the current problem is tied to “eminent domain” issues, granting the power of the government to take private property for public use… “Unfortunately, we’re permitting the wells but not the pipelines to connect to the wells.” “…Looking ahead, Scott expects the debate over carbon capture to intensify unless state leaders take a more active role in supporting the technology.”

Politico: Judge casts doubt on challenges to ANWR oil drilling
Alex Guillén, 10/29/26

“A federal judge on Thursday appeared skeptical of a trio of lawsuits that challenge the Trump administration’s plans to lease oil and gas drilling rights in a scenic part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge,” Politico reports. “Environmental groups and Alaska Natives argue that drilling would disrupt the refuge’s unique biological and cultural components. But during a hearing in Anchorage, Judge Sharon Gleason of the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska focused on a congressional directive telling the Interior Department to resume leasing in the area… “The challengers argue that oil and gas drilling threaten a caribou herd that Alaska Native tribes rely on for subsistence, as well as protected species such as polar bears and various birds. They also complained that Interior went beyond what Congress authorized, including the stipulation that just 2,000 acres of the coastal plain be covered by production and support facilities.”

Wisconsin Public Radio: Owners pull the plug on proposed $1B natural gas plant in northern Wisconsin
Danielle Kaeding, 10/28/26

“The owners of a proposed $1 billion gas-fired power plant in northern Wisconsin are officially calling it quits on the Nemadji Trail Energy Center in Superior,” Wisconsin Public Radio reports. “La Crosse-based Dairyland Power Cooperative and South Shore Energy notified the Public Service Commission that they’re canceling the project in a letter filed Wednesday by Daniel McCourtney, manager of strategic environmental initiatives at Allete… “In 2020, the PSC granted approvals, or certificates of public convenience and necessity, to the project’s owners to build a natural gas plant that would produce between 550 and 625 megawatts of power. The utilities said the project would provide a reliable source of electricity as they shifted away from coal and invest in renewable energy. However, the project faced years of legal challenges from Indigenous and environmental groups, local opposition and permitting delays. Clean Wisconsin and Sierra Club had asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to hear its lawsuit challenging the PSC’s decision to approve the plant, but the state’s high court declined to hear the case… “The city of Superior had also denied local approvals. Residents, tribes and environmental groups had raised concerns about the plant’s contribution to heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions, air and noise pollution, and effects on wetlands.”

Taxpayers for Common Sense: North Dakota’s Federal Oil and Gas Leasing, and What It Has Cost Taxpayers
10/27/26

“North Dakota is the third-largest producer of oil and fifth-largest producer of gas from federal lands. Over the last decade companies have produced $27.6 billion worth of oil and gas from federal lands in North Dakota. Yet because federal leasing terms were set at below-market rates, taxpayers did not receive the full value of those publicly owned resources and may be left to shoulder substantial future cleanup costs,” according to Taxpayers for Common Sense. “The federal government charges a 12.5 percent royalty rate for production on federal land, significantly lower than what is charged on state lands in North Dakota and other major oil- and gas-producing states. If an 18.75 percent royalty rate had been applied to the $27.6 billion worth of oil and gas produced from federal lands in North Dakota over the last decade, federal and North Dakota taxpayers would have received an additional $1.8 billion in revenue… “If outdated bonding requirements returned and BLM once again held average bond coverage of just $3,873 per well, the federal government would hold only $13.2 million in financial assurances for wells that may cost roughly $242 million to reclaim, leaving taxpayers exposed to approximately $229 million in potential future liabilities.”

Smart Cities Dive: Data centers on more than 3 dozen local ballots
Robyn Griggs Lawrence, 10/29/26

“Voters in dozens of localities across 10 states will decide on 41 ballot measures related to data centers on Nov. 3, according to Ballotpedia. Seventeen of the measures call for prohibiting data center development, while eight would empower local governments to permit it,” Smart Cities Dive reports. “At least 49 local ballot measures related to data centers have been or will be on the ballot in 13 states in 2026, according to Ballotpedia. All six that have already been decided limit development… “More than half of the Nov. 3 ballot measures — 21 — are in Ohio, one of the fastest-growing hubs for data center investment with 257 data centers in the state. Eleven of the local ballot measures ask voters to prohibit data centers, and six call for zoning changes related to their development. At least 138 Ohio municipalities and townships have already placed moratoriums on data center development, and 23 communities in the state have effectively banned them, according to the Ohio Capital Journal… “It’s not surprising that we have this many local ballot initiatives on data center moratoriums, and particularly in Ohio because of the higher concentration there,” Ishyan Veluppillai, who tracks state and local data center policy for energy companies and investors at investment advisor group Capstone, told Smart Cities Dive. “As communities across this calendar year have been trying to respond to projects that are being announced in their own backyards, this is one of the tools that some communities are using to properly regulate the industry and future projects.”

EXTRACTION

Pro Publica: How a Secret Vote by U.N. Scientists Legitimized Carbon Capture and Skewed Decades of Climate Policy
Katie Worth, Amy Westervelt and Maddie Stone, 10/30/26

“In the spring of 2005, the United Nations convened more than 100 of the world’s top scientists in the medieval town of Oviedo, Spain. They were there to finish writing a paradigm-shifting report about a technology that they hoped could help stop climate change,” Pro Publica reports. “To celebrate the report’s impending completion, the meeting’s hosts handed out bottles of cava, Spanish sparkling wine, with tongue-in-cheek labels stating that they were to be opened only by those who truly believed it could work. Belief was necessary because the technology — carbon capture and storage, or CCS — had barely been tested. The idea was simple: strip carbon dioxide from smokestacks before it could flow into the air and warm the planet. Then pump it into a porous part of the Earth’s crust and leave it there. Forever. The experts in Oviedo had stacks of papers proving that parts of the process worked. But major questions remained about how much space exists inside the Earth to store the CO2, how effectively it could be monitored and whether the poisonous, concentrated gas would reliably stay underground… “The evidence was scant. Three large-scale experiments were underway, but only one — a Norwegian operation that captured carbon from a natural gas field and pumped it under the bed of the North Sea — had rigorously tested permanent storage. There, the injected CO2 astonished engineers when it floated 700 feet upward through a series of geologic formations. To their relief, it hit a ceiling of shale that kept it underground, and the project was deemed a success. But with so little to go on, the scientists warned in their first draft that any broad statement about leakage risk would be “almost meaningless.” “…The industry, documents show, saw CCS as a way to forestall that outcome, allowing the world to keep burning fossil fuels while simply burying the pollution underground. A U.N. report would bring the technology into the mainstream… “With so little evidence to work with, David Keith, a Canadian physicist, proposed a workaround: The authors could conduct an “expert elicitation,” taking an anonymous survey about what they expected the evidence to eventually show… “Five months later, the IPCC published its special report, which would help legitimize CCS for a generation. The 431-page document portrayed CCS as a potential savior for the climate that could enable countries “to continue to include fossil fuels in their energy mix.” “…It acknowledged that there were still gaps in research and experience with the technology — offering extensive detail deep within its pages about the challenges and uncertainties of piecing together separate but proven steps in the CCS process. But its summary stated that “there are no major technical or knowledge barriers” to storing captured CO2 underground… “The special report has been cited in thousands of academic papers, in legislative testimony and in media coverage validating carbon capture and storage as a realistic solution to global warming… “An investigation by Drilled and ProPublica found there’s reason to doubt carbon capture and storage will ever succeed at the scale needed to offer a significant climate solution.”

Press release: IPCC Invites Experts to Review Draft Methodology Report on Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies, Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage
10/30/26

“The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has opened registration for experts to review the First Order Draft of the 2027 IPCC Methodology Report on Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies, Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (Additional guidance). The Expert Review will run from 2 November to 20 December 2026. Expert review is the first stage in the IPCC’s multi-stage review process, one of the most comprehensive and transparent procedures in international science assessment. During this stage, experts assess the draft and provide comments on its scientific and technical accuracy, completeness, clarity and applicability to national greenhouse gas inventories… “The Panel approved the preparation of this methodology report during its 63rd Session in Lima, Peru, in October 2025 and agreed its outline. The report will provide additional methodological guidance for estimating and reporting greenhouse gas emissions and removals associated with carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies and carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) activities in national greenhouse gas inventories. “Reliable national greenhouse gas inventories are essential for tracking progress towards climate goals. As carbon dioxide removal and carbon capture technologies develop, it is important that inventory methodologies keep pace with these developments. This report will help countries address that challenge,” said Takeshi Enoki, the other TFI Co-Chair.”

Bioengineer.org: Tracking CO2 Underground: A Review Maps Real-Time Monitoring for Carbon Storage
10/29/26

“Burying carbon dioxide deep underground only works if engineers can watch where it goes. A comprehensive review published in the open-access journal Carbon Neutral Systems examines the geophysical methods used to monitor CO2 plumes in real time at carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) sites, evaluating their accuracy, sensitivity, and reliability across laboratory tests, pilot projects, and full-scale operations,” Bioengineer.org reports. “The review, led by Tayyab Shahid and Khizar Abid with Alexander Hessinger and Catalin Teodoriu, organizes monitoring around five objectives: tracking the plume’s spatial and temporal migration, verifying that it stays within the planned storage zone, detecting leaks through faults, fractures, or wellbore failures, monitoring stress and deformation of the reservoir and caprock, and assuring that shallow aquifers and surface ecosystems remain unharmed. Each technique serves one or more of these goals, and the authors stress that no single method can cover an entire CCS site on its own… “The review concludes that integrated, multi-method monitoring is essential, since geophysical signals are rarely unique to CO2: gravity anomalies can reflect groundwater movement, microseismicity can stem from natural seismicity or unrelated pressure changes, and resistivity shifts can arise from salinity, temperature, or pore-pressure variation. The authors highlight three promising combinations: microseismic monitoring paired with time-lapse VSP for continuous event detection plus periodic high-resolution imaging; ERT combined with distributed fiber-optic sensing for complementary resistivity and strain measurements; and MEMS gravimetry joined with campaign-based gravity surveys to bridge near-wellbore sensing with reservoir-scale monitoring. They call for coordinated multi-site field trials to validate emerging technologies at operational CCS conditions before a fully reliable real-time monitoring framework can be deployed.”

Bloomberg: New US Data Centers Projected to Emit More Carbon Than All of Mexico
Eric Roston and Olivia Raimonde, 10/28/26

“The surge in construction of fossil-fueled power plants to run AI data centers is set to undo 15 years’ worth of greenhouse gas reductions from US electricity generation, according to an internal analysis by the Sierra Club,” Bloomberg reports. “The US power sector would emit 2.1 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide by 2030, after factoring in planned AI projects. That’s 618 million tons more than 2025 levels, by the Sierra Club’s calculations, or about a 42% increase. A year and a half ago, researchers at the nonprofit environmental group would have estimated that the buildout and its impact would have been a quarter or half of current projections, Jeremy Fisher, the Sierra Club’s principal advisor for climate and energy, told Bloomberg… “The bulk of the expected emissions by 2030 would come from sources that are not directly linked to the grid, often built by tech companies to avoid the long wait for a connection. These could exceed 460 million tons, Fisher told Bloomberg, roughly the same as the annual emissions of Mexico.”

Reuters: Shell and Total post highest quarterly profit since 2022
Shadia Nasralla, Stephanie Kelly and Dimitri Rhodes, 10/29/26

“Shell and TotalEnergies reported on Thursday sharply higher third-quarter profits and raised share buybacks, as war-driven energy prices and record refining margins helped ‌both beat expectations,” Reuters reports. “Shell raised its quarterly buyback to $5 billion from $3 billion, the second-largest buyback on record, while Total reiterated plans to buy back $2.5 billion of shares in the fourth quarter and said it would buy back another $2.5 billion in the first quarter of 2027. The shareholder distributions offer an insight into how oil majors plan to spend the profits generated by the US-Israeli war with Iran, which is in its ninth month and has ​disrupted global energy supplies. Energy prices have driven inflation for customers globally and increased input costs for industry… “Refining margins nearly quadrupled for both Shell and Total compared ​with a year ago. They reached $42 a barrel and $33.2 per barrel, respectively, helping to boost earnings to the highest since 2022, when Shell delivered a record $6 billion buyback programme.”

Latitude Media: The cracks in the AI race for onsite gas power
Catherine Boudreau, 10/28/26

“Cracks are emerging in the rush to build out on-site gas power for massive data centers. Literally,” Latitude Media reports. “We’ve been hearing stories about large power providers and EPCs fielding a growing volume of calls from data center developers that are blowing gas-fired turbines, and need help fixing mechanical failures because they lack their own operations and maintenance expertise. Meanwhile, projects that lean into behind-the-meter gas plants are vulnerable to fuel price shocks and pipeline constraints — risks that Anthropic detailed in its highly anticipated IPO filing this week… “The company only briefly mentioned clean energy like solar, wind, battery storage, nuclear, and geothermal, stating that it “may not be available in the quantities or on the timelines we require, or may be available only at higher cost.” Despite the red flags, the race to build onsite gas shows no signs of slowing down. Cleanview this month estimated there are 110 gigawatts of onsite gas projects underway, up from 20 GWs last summer. Hyperscalers want to get data centers online as quickly as possible to start cashing in on their trillion-dollar infrastructure investment, and yearslong delays to hook up to the grid aren’t cutting it. That means building gigawatts of onsite power with even higher levels of reliability than a typical power plant, because data centers operate 24/7. So far this year, there’s been several reports of data centers’ onsite power equipment malfunctioning… “These kinds of issues often stem from the unique power demands of AI workloads, which can trigger megawatt-level fluctuations within milliseconds that stress equipment, according to industry research and interviews with power developers.”

Carbon Herald: Canada Falling Further Behind On 2030 Climate Target, Auditor General Says
Theodora Stankova, 10/30/26

“Canada is moving further away from its 2030 climate commitment as the federal government rolls back or weakens measures intended to curb greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, according to a report released by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development on October 29,” the Carbon Herald reports. “The audit found that current projections point to a 28% emissions reduction from 2005 levels by 2030, down from the 36% projected in the government’s 2023 progress report… “Canada has pledged to reduce emissions by 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by the end of the decade. Data for 2024 show that emissions had fallen by 10% since the baseline year, excluding the land-use, land-use change and forestry sector… “The report urges the government to accelerate emissions reductions and strengthen accountability as fewer than four years remain before the 2030 deadline.”

Bloomberg: Health Damages From Climate Change Are Increasing Faster
Leslie Kaufman, 10/27/26

“The negative health impacts of climate change are not only increasing but doing so at a faster pace than a decade ago, according to a major global assessment released Wednesday,” Bloomberg reports. “The 10th annual Lancet Countdown report — by an international collaboration of scientists that tracks the relationship between global warming and human health — compares the decade since the signing of the Paris climate agreement with the decade before. It finds that several major health threats, including deadly heat and drought, increased more rapidly after the accord, even as countries ramped up investments in clean energy and protecting people from climate hazards. Annual heat-related deaths were nearly 36% higher in the period 2016 through 2023 than from 2006 through 2015, the analysis finds. In 2023 alone, heat was linked to an estimated 710,000 deaths worldwide. Heat exposure is also trimming the gross domestic product of countries around the globe, with Southeast Asia and Africa the worst-affected regions. For the first time, the Countdown calculated how many heat-related deaths could be attributed to human-caused climate change. The researchers estimate warming was responsible for more than 70% of those deaths in 2023 and almost 3 million from 2016 through 2023.”

DeSmog: ‘Snipped And Posted’: How Pro-Oil Groups Generate Viral Content Online
Taylor Noakes, 10/22/26

“In December 2025, former B.C. Premier Christy Clark gave an interview on Global News where she described Canada’s west coast ban on oil tankers as a “ridiculous” constraint on the Canadian economy,” DeSmog reports. “…Within days, the interview clip was spreading across the social media feeds of people in B.C. and beyond, eventually surpassing 1.6 million views. But this was not necessarily a case of west coast residents suddenly deciding organically they wanted to overturn the ban on coastal oil tanker traffic brought in by former Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. The digital media amplification of Clark’s comments was orchestrated in part by Canada Action, a pro-oil industry advocacy organization partly funded by Cenovus Energy, Canada’s third-largest oil and gas company. It was one example of “showcasing Canada Action’s content leadership influencing the public discussion,” according to an internal slidedeck from the Calgary-based group. That slidedeck, which hasn’t yet been reported on, was obtained by Greenpeace Canada and published in its October 2026 report Manufacturing Petro-Populism. These and other presentation slides from Canada Action demonstrate how fossil fuel interests manufacture the appearance of consent for increased oil and gas production in Canada, according to experts who study the spread of climate disinformation online… “Canada Action was founded in 2012 by Cody Battershill, a Calgary-based realtor. Though Canada Action claims to be a grassroots effort, it has numerous reported ties to the fossil fuel sector and its lobbyists. According to the Greenpeace report, Canada Action spent $1.9 million CAD on marketing in 2024, and $1.5 million CAD in 2023… “According to the Greenpeace report, Energy in Action is an oil-industry backed network of thirty organizations that advocate for the fossil fuel sector, including front groups, charitable organizations, companies, media organizations and lobby groups.”

Reuters: How could the oil spill off the UAE coast affect desalination plants?
Federico Maccioni, 10/28/26

“An oil spill off the United Arab Emirates that has prompted temporary restrictions on fishing and on access to several beaches has raised concerns over the risk of environmental contamination and the potential impact on desalination plants,” Reuters reports. “…The incident off the UAE has also raised questions about what impact oil spills can have on desalination plants, which crowd the Emirati coastline and, just as in other Gulf countries, are a supplier of water. In ​the UAE, desalinated water accounts for more than 80% of potable water… “Maritime intelligence firm Windward said on Sunday that the leak threatened the seawater intake of the ⁠Naqa’a desalination plant at the border between Umm Al Quwain and Ras Al Khaimah… “Plants need to be shut down as soon as oil gets anywhere near them to avoid contamination, Boxall told Reuters. Nidal Hilal, director of New York University Abu Dhabi’s Water Research Center, told Reuters oil spills can threaten desalination plants ​even when the oil does not physically reach the ​plant, with the principal vulnerability being the seawater ⁠intake, which draws raw seawater into the facility for treatment… “Technical studies and previous incidents have shown that oil contamination can disrupt desalination operations and even damage treatment equipment, ​Hilal told Reuters.”

OPINION

Earthjustice: What Will BAAJA Do? Whatever the Trump Administration Wants
Abigail Dillen is president of Earthjustice, 10/28/26

”If you are following the hot debate over the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026 (BAAJA), you are likely thinking more than usual about howitzers. As reported in Heatmap, John Podesta is cutting through the noise and sounding the decisive alarm: Why would Democrats hand over more power for President Trump to abuse? Or in other words, don’t give Trump a loaded howitzer!,” Abigail Dillen writes for Earthjustice. “Over the next two years, BAAJA would create more legal runway for this president to make corrupt deals and greenlight harmful projects of all kinds, and it would constrain any future president from repairing the damage… “The bill would make it faster and easier for the president to hand out federal approvals and financial assistance without transparency or meaningful review, courtesy of provisions that would significantly limit or even dispense with requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and the Clean Water Act (CWA). Notably, the bill would exempt from NEPA and NHPA review all federal loans, loan guarantees, and other forms of federal financial assistance, giving the president the ability to provide federal backing that would speed the financing for major capital projects… “But tinkering at the edges is not going to fix the problem at BAAJA’s core… “When democracies are at the cliff’s edge, among the most important guardrails are the law and the people’s ability to go to court and challenge the government that is turning against them. All of this to say, taking down the guardrails is a dangerously bad idea.”

The Crucial Years: The President is Equal Parts Moron and Monster
Bill McKibben, 10/29/26

“…The trouble with his current gust of malignity, however, is that right now a pair of Democrats in the Senate—Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico—have been trying to persuade their colleagues, and by extension the rest of the country, to support a ‘permitting reform’ bill that would make it easier to build energy stuff,” Bill McKibben writes for The Crucial Years. “It’s traveling under the name BAAJA, for Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act, I guess on the grounds that ‘affordability’ is something all right-minded people support (except, of course, for Trump who thinks it, like global warming, is a ‘hoax.’) Anyway, the grand bargain these two Senators have struck with the oil industry is hundreds of pages long, and would overturn much of the environmental review process in America… “However, Podesta said they are ‘going to have to take it out’ or significantly revise it because he believes this language would allow Trump to illegally approve projects on sensitive or protected lands and courts would not be able to force the government to undo approvals that violate the law. He argued this would mean Trump could permit development in many areas land conservation groups, tribes, and anti-drilling advocates have long fought to protect from industry, including the Chaco Culture National Historic Park in New Mexico, the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness in Minnesota, and the Bears Ears National Monument in Utah… “Most sweepingly, the bill’s certainty provisions would render Trump permitting decisions irrevocable with very limited exceptions. The next administration would likely inherit a raft of destructive and unpopular projects, and BAAJA would make it wildly risky financially and even impossible for the next president to revisit them. To be clear, the damage would not be confined to energy-related projects. Think detention centers, petrochemical complexes, data centers on public lands — whatever kinds of projects appeal to this president.”

OilPrice.com: The CCS Project That Passed Every Test Except the Investment Test
Leon Stille, 10/29/26

“Heidelberg Materials’ proposed carbon capture project in Edmonton appeared to contain almost every ingredient policymakers say a successful CCS development needs,” Leon Stille writes for OilPrice.com. “It targeted cement, a hard-to-abate industry where most emissions come from the chemistry of producing clinker rather than simply burning fuel. A pilot confirmed that capture was technically feasible. The Canadian government offered substantial support. A pipeline and geological storage route had been identified. Alberta already operated an industrial carbon-pricing system… “That does not prove carbon capture has failed. It proves something more useful: technology readiness and policy support do not automatically create investment readiness. The project could capture the carbon. It could not yet capture sufficiently predictable revenue. When Heidelberg and the Canadian government announced their partnership in 2023, the estimated project cost was CAD 1.36 billion… “Yet reported capital estimates later approached CAD 2 billion. More importantly, the value available for each avoided tonne weakened… “At those values, Heidelberg concluded that proceeding was not a responsible use of shareholder capital. The pilot worked. The financial model did not… ”Technology readiness asks whether the plant can capture a tonne of CO?. Investment readiness asks who pays for that tonne, under what contract, for how many years and what happens when policy or infrastructure fails. Edmonton answered the first question. The CCS market will scale only when projects can answer the second before asking shareholders to sign the cheque.”