EXTRACTED: Daily News Clips 2/9/24

PIPELINE NEWS

• Courthouse News Service: Line 5 oil pipeline fight goes to the Seventh Circuit

• Associated Press: Enbridge appeals to vacate an order that would shut down its pipeline

• Cedar Rapids Gazette: Landowners, C02 pipeline protesters stage die-in at Iowa Capitol

• Bismarck Tribune: North Dakota PSC finalizes local ordinance decision; some intervenors still not convinced

• Press release: Landowners, Counties & Local Advocates Respond to North Dakota Public Service Commission’s Decision Overruling Local Zoning Ordinances Regarding Pipeline Issues

• KXNET: Public Service Commission agrees to CO2 pipeline ruling

• Public News Service: ND law at center of carbon pipeline fight now under scrutiny

WASHINGTON UPDATES

• Wall Street Journal: How the Rockefellers and Billionaire Donors Pressured Biden on LNG Exports

• E&E News: Manchin calls for immediate end to LNG export review pause

• New York Times: Why the Cost of Biden’s Climate Law Keeps Going Up

• E&E News: House Dems game out climate messaging at policy retreat

• Energy News Network: Environmental justice groups ask feds to resist weakening rules on clean hydrogen tax credit 

• Globe and Mail: The U.S. is buying a lot of Canadian oil

STATE UPDATES

• The Lens NOLA: Formosa Plastics gets air permits back, but a few hurdles remain

• Denver Gazette: Colorado, Wyoming governors host carbon capture summit in Denver

• Carlsbad Current-Argus: Lawmakers hope to block oil wells near homes, schools via New Mexico Senate memorial

• Reuters: BP Whiting, Indiana refinery to be shut up to three weeks – Sources

• Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: As We Energies readies to close its Oak Creek coal plant, it’s planning a new gas plant on site

EXTRACTION

• CNBC: World surpasses key warming threshold across an entire year for the first time

• Washington Post: Earth crossed 1.5C of warming this year. Here’s what to know.

• Associated Press: Jury awards climate scientist Michael Mann $1 million in defamation lawsuit

• Canadian Press: ‘Not be tolerated’: Alberta files formal response to proposed oilsands emissions cap

• Reuters: California Resources to buy Aera in $2.1 bln deal to boost oil production

CLIMATE FINANCE

• Wall Street Journal: Dutch Pension Fund Sells Major Oil Stakes in $3 Billion Energy Divestment

• Reuters: Dutch pension fund leading climate talks with Shell divests most oil investments

TODAY IN GREENWASHING

• Canadian Energy Centre: Whooping Crane Recovery Program Receives a Lift From Canada’s Largest Oil and Gas Producer

OPINION

• San Jose Mercury News: Carbon capture in Montezuma Wetlands is a dangerous plan

• Slate: Carbon Offsets Have a Fatal Flaw

• Jacobin Magazine: Canada’s Carbon Emissions Cover-Up

• The Hill: Biden’s LNG decision will make it harder to reach our climate goals

• The Hill: Biden’s misguided LNG pause follows Carter’s path to a one-term presidency

• The Hill: Why the US pause on natural gas exports is a win for consumers  

• The Conversation: Biden’s ‘hard look’ at liquefied natural gas exports raises a critical question: How does natural gas fit with US climate goals?
  

PIPELINE NEWS

Courthouse News Service: Line 5 oil pipeline fight goes to the Seventh Circuit
DAVE BYRNES, 2/8/24

“Attorneys for both the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and oil pipeline operator Enbridge were in the Windy City on Thursday, trying to convince the Seventh Circuit to weigh in on a fight over Enbridge’s 70-year-old Line 5 oil pipeline,” Courthouse News Service reports. “…The district court here correctly recognized that Enbridge is engaged in an ongoing and intentional trespass on sovereign land that creates a public nuisance at the meander of the Bad River,” the Band’s attorney Paul Clement told the three-justice appellate panel Thursday. In its appellate brief the Band made clear that it wants Line 5 off its land immediately, not in three years, and that it wants a greater share of the estimated $1.1 billion in profits the company has made by running oil through Line 5 since 2013. It also rejected Enbridge’s proposed reroute of the pipeline, which hugs the borders of the reservation and still runs through the Bad River watershed… “He also accused Enbridge of wanting to continue “business as usual,” and predicted that if Conley’s order were left in place the company would find an excuse to continue operations past the 2026 deadline… “The judges accused the Band of not taking any independent steps to address its environmental concerns over the Bad River meander, where the soil that covers the pipeline is eroding. Easterbrook also took issue with Clement’s environmental arguments, claiming that to move the pipeline out of the Bad River watershed would only move it into “some other watershed.” “…Both claimed that the Band should not responsible for alleviating an environmental problem Enbridge’s pipeline created, and further argued that to shore up barriers at the meander would only extend the company’s trespass… “The one point on which all the parties — including the appellate panel — agreed was that it was frustrating how little the U.S. government itself had gotten involved in the dispute… “Easterbrook said that the panel would not rule on the case for at least a month, and that it wanted to hear from the federal government before making a decision.”

Associated Press: Enbridge appeals to vacate an order that would shut down its pipeline
TODD RICHMOND, 2/8/24

“An attorney for the energy company Enbridge tried to persuade a federal appellate court Thursday to vacate an order that would shut down part of a pipeline running through a Wisconsin tribal reservation,” the Associated Press reports. “…She said Conley’s order violates a 1977 treaty between the United States and Canada that states no authority in either country shall impede the flow of oil and natural gas through pipelines between the two nations… “The Bad River tribe’s attorney, Paul Clement, implored the judges to go beyond Conley’s order. He urged them to shut down the pipeline immediately to protect the environment from a potential spill and increase the financial penalties Conley imposed on Enbridge for trespassing on the reservation… “The appellate judges questioned why government agencies haven’t moved faster to grant Enbridge permits to reroute the pipeline. They also chastised the tribe for not taking preemptive steps to protect the area from a possible spill, such as placing sandbags around it. Loughran said the tribe hasn’t allowed Enbridge to take protective steps, while Clement countered that the tribe shouldn’t have to do anything since Enbridge is trespassing. The judges sounded frustrated with the two sides refusing to work together. “The parties have mutually declared war against each other,” Judge Michael Scudder said.

Cedar Rapids Gazette: Landowners, C02 pipeline protesters stage die-in at Iowa Capitol
2/8/24

“Landowners and environmentalists staged a die-in Thursday at the Iowa Capitol as part of rally urging lawmakers to pass legislation to address growing concerns about safety and the use of eminent domain for proposed carbon capture pipelines,” the Cedar Rapids Gazette reports. “Dozens of landowners expressed growing frustration in rural areas with Senate leadership and Gov. Kim Reynolds for failing to support efforts to limiting the pipelines in Iowa… “Senate Republicans, thus far, have refused to take up the bill. House Republicans, frustrated that Senate hasn’t taken up the bill, advanced another bill in recent weeks that would allow the Iowa Legislature to intervene in the permitting process of a pipeline or other energy project seeking to use eminent domain… “House Study Bill 608 would give the Legislature power to pause an Iowa Utilities Board proceeding and creates a new process for landowners to seek a declaratory order from a judge. The bill, however, would not be retroactive, so the review of Summit’s proposal would not be disrupted. The bill is set to be heard in front of the House Judiciary Committee soon. Another bill, Senate File 2097, would give counties the right to enact zoning ordinances that would set restrictions for carbon pipelines… “Landowners during Thursday rally showed video of a test rupture of a carbon pipeline and read news reports and described the health impacts of pipeline ruptures in other states.”

Bismarck Tribune: North Dakota PSC finalizes local ordinance decision; some intervenors still not convinced
JOEY HARRIS, 2/7/24

“North Dakota’s Public Service Commission concluded Wednesday that its authority automatically supersedes local ordinances in pipeline siting applications, a move it indicated it would make two weeks ago during a work session. But the decision will likely face challenges if the pipeline it is related to ultimately gets approved,” the Bismarck Tribune reports. “…On Wednesday he again brought up the changes to the law, arguing it limits the PSC’s flexibility on the issue… “Still, intervenors who responded to Tribune inquiries maintained their legal differences with the PSC. The decision could get appealed to court. Emmons County attorney Derrick Braaten told the Tribune there would likely be a response, but he does not “know when and what it will be quite yet” given that in order to preempt local ordinances, the PSC must first approve the pipeline. “We disagree on how they’re interpreting the law. I think the legislators were pretty clear that they didn’t want to take away local control, and that’s what’s happening here,” he told the Tribune. Attorneys Brian Jorde and Steve Leibel, who represent various landowners across the proposed route, also told the Tribune there will likely be a challenge. They pointed to the phrase “designated corridor” not being removed from the law the PSC references in its decision. A corridor is the broader area in which a pipeline can be placed. Jorde and Leibel told the Tribune despite being able to now apply for both a designated corridor and a route permit together, as Summit has, it does not change the designated corridor needing to be approved first. “Think of it as the toll road — you’ve got to get through the toll, you’ve got to follow the rules and now we have nine different lanes we can choose,” Jorde told the Tribune. “So here’s the entire highway — that’s the corridor — now, which lane of those are you picking, the specific one? They’re two different things; we analyze them different, and the preemption power of the (PSC) only applies to the latter, the exact route after the corridor has been greenlighted.”

Press release: Landowners, Counties & Local Advocates Respond to North Dakota Public Service Commission’s Decision Overruling Local Zoning Ordinances Regarding Pipeline Issues
2/8/24

“Yesterday, the North Dakota Public Service Commission (PSC) made a pivotal decision regarding pipeline zoning issues, ruling that state regulations take precedence over local ordinances. In a unanimous 3-0 vote, the PSC’s determination signifies a significant shift in authority, favoring state rules over community-based zoning measures. While Dakota Resource Council (DRC) strongly disagrees with this decision, the organization aligns with Commissioner Christmann’s call for all North Dakotans to familiarize themselves with state law. Despite assertions made during the proceedings regarding legislative changes in 2019, it’s crucial to note that no substantive alterations occurred during 2019. SB 2038, referenced in the proceedings, was clarified as a “technical correction bill” aimed at facilitating legislative changes from 2017. Contrary to claims, the legislative history underscores assurances that the law would not diminish local control. The Petroleum Council lobbyist even emphasized that compliance directives should originate from the PSC, without eroding local authority. This decision also disregards the distinction between a certificate of corridor compatibility and a route permit, a point emphasized in NDCC 49-22.1-13. Chairman Porter’s comments in 2017 further clarified the legislature’s intent regarding this distinction. Curt Stofferahn, Chair of Dakota Resource Council, expressed profound disappointment in the PSC’s decision, labeling it a significant setback for local governance in North Dakota. Stofferahn emphasized the importance of empowering local officials to enact zoning ordinances that safeguard community interests and characteristics, rather than succumbing to the agendas of foreign-backed corporations. “The people of North Dakota should not have to relinquish their rights to accommodate the profit-driven ventures of CO2 pipeline companies,” stated Curt Stofferahn, Chair of Dakota Resource Council. “Local officials understand the unique needs and dynamics of their communities and should retain the authority to enact measures that secure their future.” DRC urges North Dakotans to remain vigilant and informed about state laws and decisions impacting their communities. Upholding the principles of local governance and citizen participation is essential in preserving the integrity and autonomy of North Dakota’s towns and counties. Emmons County attorney Derrick Braaten told the Bismarck Tribune there would likely be a response, but he does not “know when and what it will be quite yet” given that in order to preempt local ordinances, the PSC must first approve the pipeline… “Attorneys Brian Jorde and Steve Leibel, who represent various landowners across the proposed route, also told the Tribune there will likely be a challenge. They pointed to the phrase “designated corridor” not being removed from the law the PSC references in its decision. A corridor is the broader area in which a pipeline can be placed… “Bold Alliance founder Jane Kleeb: “The industry is always suing counties and landowners so they can keep running roughshod over their property rights. At some point, our country needs to honor local zoning and property rights, instead of always giving corporations whatever they want with no guardrails in place. We want basic protections and are not getting them because of corporate greed.” 

KXNET: Public Service Commission agrees to CO2 pipeline ruling
Joel Porter, 2/7/24

“On Wednesday afternoon, the Public Service Commission voted 3-0 in favor of a rule pertaining to a carbon dioxide pipeline,” KXNET reports. “…PSC chair Randy Christmann states that under a law that was changed by the legislature in 2019, a pipeline project will supersede locally passed ordinances. Recently, SCS filed a request asking the state to override two ordinances passed in Burleigh and Emmons County which put more strict limits on how the pipeline could be built in both counties. “This one traverses over 300 miles,” stated Christmann. “Presumably, every township along the way could have their own ordinances. How would something get built if it has to be designed separately for everyone?” “Burleigh County Commission is unanimous in this opposition of the use of eminent domain for a carbon dioxide pipeline,” stated County Commissioner Brian Bitner. “We believe our ordinances were adopted with public input and meetings, and those ordinances are what Burleigh County citizens, through the normal process, decided that they would be okay with.” “…An SCS spokesperson shared this statement following Wednesday’s vote: “The North Dakota Public Service Commission (PSC) unanimously voted that county ordinances are preempted. Summit Carbon Solutions acknowledges and respects the PSC’s decision as it allows for progress on our pipeline project. This move facilitates our efforts to navigate the regulatory landscape with more predictability.” “…A final vote on the siting permit will happen at a later date.”

Public News Service: ND law at center of carbon pipeline fight now under scrutiny
Mike Moen, 2/9/24

“A North Dakota lawmaker is calling into question a state law change that drew a lot of attention this week,” Public News Service reports. “At issue is a regulatory decision for a planned underground pipeline to store carbon dioxide. North Dakota’s Public Service Commission said local ordinances to set route restrictions for such of projects are preempted by state rules… “Rep. SuAnn Olson, R-Baldwin, wonders whether recent changes to the law tied to the decision should be in place anymore. “It was never envisioned, I’m sure, to be this far-reaching,” Olson told PNS. “No doubt the PSC, all they can do is wrestle with what the current Century Code said. What it said to me is that the Legislature really needs to look at that, this next session.” “…Summit has argued the local ordinances are unreasonably restrictive, and contended it will use strong safety measures. But Olson, who represents an area along the proposed route, does not feel reassured. “If there is a breach, this pipeline is near so much population — or has the ability to touch so many people — that the route they’re proposing, north of Bismarck, is untenable, in my view,” Olson told PNS… “Meanwhile, an attorney representing landowners fighting the project said his team plans to appeal the Public Service Commission decision.”

WASHINGTON UPDATES

Wall Street Journal: How the Rockefellers and Billionaire Donors Pressured Biden on LNG Exports
Benoît Morenne, Andrew Restuccia, 2/8/24

“Charities controlled by members of the Rockefeller family and billionaire donors were key funders of a successful campaign to pressure President Biden to pause new approvals of liquefied natural gas exports from the U.S.,” according to the Wall Street Journal. “The Rockefellers, along with other wealthy donors including the philanthropy of Michael Bloomberg, have provided millions of dollars in recent years to front-line environmental groups that are campaigning against fossil-fuel projects, including LNG terminals that have been proposed on the Gulf Coast, people familiar with the effort told the Journal… “The billionaire-backed campaign, starting around four years ago, worked to identify and fund community leaders already campaigning against fossil-fuel projects. The activists buttonholed White House and federal officials in Washington, Houston and Dubai as part of a high-intensity grassroots campaign… “They got our attention,” a senior Biden administration official told the Journal of the activists’ efforts, describing the campaign as intense… “In 2018, the Rockefeller Family Fund, a charity created by some of the heirs of John D. Rockefeller, launched an initiative called the Funder Collaborative on Oil and Gas to call attention to the U.S.’s status as an oil-and-gas juggernaut and encourage green funders to do more. Some of the Rockefeller heirs have campaigned for years against Exxon Mobil, a successor to Standard Oil, the fossil-fuel monopoly founded by the Rockefeller patriarch… “They met with front-line leaders opposed to the projects, and started making grants to their organizations. Among them was Roishetta Ozane, a single mom of six from Sulphur, La., who has emerged as one of the campaign’s foremost voices. The environmental-justice activist had for years been trying to alert large environmental groups about a fossil-fuel expansion in southwestern Louisiana, largely in vain, she told the Journal. “Funders like to fund if they feel like they’re going to win, and they didn’t feel like they were going to win against LNG,” she told the Journal… “A few days after the announcement, Sarah Brennan, an associate director at the Rockefeller Family Fund, celebrated the win. “The pause…is the result of a sustained four-year push that built upon years of opposition to gas exports by community groups and lawyers,” she wrote in an email to environmental groups. “The White House recognized the power [of] this campaign.”

E&E News: Manchin calls for immediate end to LNG export review pause
Nico Portuondo, 2/8/24

“Sen. Joe Manchin pushed a prominent Department of Energy official Thursday to “immediately” lift the administration’s pause on liquefied natural gas export permits,” E&E News reports. “The Energy and Natural Resources Committee chair’s position is an escalation compared with previous comments. Manchin had expressed concern about the pause but appeared open to weighing its merits. During a hearing Thursday morning with Deputy Energy Secretary David Turk, Manchin did not mince words. “It sends a horrible signal,” Manchin told Turk. “I think this is a wrong, wrong direction for our country.” The White House and Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm have defended the move by saying the administration needs to make sure regulators are giving proper weight to climate and price concerns. DOE conducts national interest determinations on new export projects. Manchin argued that the pause may lead allies to see the U.S. as an unreliable supplier of LNG as Europe attempts to get off Russian fuel. He also said limiting gas exports could encourage more coal abroad.”

New York Times: Why the Cost of Biden’s Climate Law Keeps Going Up
Jim Tankersley, 2/8/24

“The estimated price tag for President Biden’s clean-energy and climate agenda has effectively doubled since the Inflation Reduction Act was signed into law a year and a half ago,” the New York Times reports. “Nearly all of the increase is attributable to forecasters’ belief that the law will be more popular than they had originally expected, in part because of the way the Biden administration wrote certain regulations. That rising price tag may actually be good for reducing greenhouse gas emissions — and for the U.S. economy. The Inflation Reduction Act, which Democrats passed on a party-line vote in summer 2022, includes tax credits and other subsidies for low-emission energy technologies that are meant to help wean the nation from fossil fuels. Many of those credits are effectively unlimited, meaning the more people or companies choose to claim them, the more they will add to federal deficits. The uncapped credits include incentives for manufacturers to build solar-panel or wind-turbine factories, and for consumers to buy electric vehicles… “The popularity of those credits has surprised forecasters. Budget office officials said Wednesday that they now expected the provisions to add about $205 billion more to deficits through 2031 than they had initially anticipated, based on joint committee estimates. Forecasters now expect the consumer credit for electric vehicles, which is as much as $7,500 for an electric car or truck, to cost several times as much as initially expected. That calculation isn’t really based on sales of electric vehicles, which hit a record last year even though annual sales growth slowed from 2022. It stems from a pair of Biden administration regulations that are meant to fuel more electric vehicle sales — and which the budget office expects to be quite effective.”

E&E News: House Dems game out climate messaging at policy retreat
Emma Dumain, 2/9/24

“Democrats have a challenge heading into the November elections: tout political victories from a historic climate law that in many cases have yet to materialize,” E&E News reports. “It’s a topic that Democratic members of the House are grappling with this week at their annual “issues conference” in the Washington exurb. Lawmakers are gathering to discuss how best to convince voters about their policy wins and plot their strategy for retaking the majority in 2025. Part of that strategy will be successfully selling the Inflation Reduction Act, the massive social spending package that included the largest-ever federal investment to combat the climate crisis… “But that talking point alone isn’t going to be what drives people to the polls, Rep. Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.), the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, told E&E. Democrats instead need to focus on what the climate gains in the Inflation Reduction Act would mean for people’s pocketbooks… “Ultimately, she added, “people are not feeling some of the benefits of what we’ve passed because they are not yet gone into effect.” “…Obviously, energy is very, very important,” Hoyer told E&E. “A way to talk about it is, ‘We’re giving credit to you, and it can mean, for instance, $7,500 to you, you purchase an electric car.’” He acknowledged, though, that IRA victories are, in general, “more difficult” to explain to voters and “harder to see,” since many of the credits have not yet been implemented: “It’s a little longer term, as opposed to insulin going to $35, which you see right away.”

Energy News Network: Environmental justice groups ask feds to resist weakening rules on clean hydrogen tax credit 
Kari Lydersen, 2/8/24

“Almost 50 environmental justice groups on Tuesday sent a letter to leaders of the federally-funded Midwestern hydrogen hub, imploring them not to try to loosen requirements for tax incentives for hydrogen produced with clean energy,” Energy News Network reports. “The U.S. Treasury in December published draft rules saying that to receive lucrative 45V tax credits for producing clean hydrogen, the energy used must not be diverted from the grid, but be “additional” energy created specifically to power the electrolysis process used to produce pure hydrogen from water. Environmental advocates are largely pleased with Treasury’s draft rules, which also say clean energy must be generated around the same time and near where it is used for hydrogen production, to reap incentives. But organizations are worried that industry groups are lobbying to weaken the draft rules, which are open for public comment through Feb. 26. The Midwest Alliance for Clean Hydrogen (MachH2), a coalition of industry and research groups that won up to $1 billion in Department of Energy hydrogen hub funding, has proposed to produce much “pink hydrogen” powered by nuclear energy from Illinois. Critics say this, as well as “green hydrogen” produced with solar and wind, could divert zero-emissions power from other users and hence prolong the lives of fossil-fuel-fired generators that fill the gaps. “If MachH2 imperils the achievement of our states’ climate goals, harms the health of our communities, and causes electricity price spikes that disproportionality impact low- and moderate-income households, it will face stiff opposition from our coalition and from communities that will bear the brunt of harmful, and avoidable, pollution,” says the letter from 47 organizations, including We the People of Detroit, Interfaith Power & Light, North Dakota Native Vote, StraightUp Solar, the Sierra Club, Eco-Justice Collaborative and Illinois People’s Action. 

Globe and Mail: The U.S. is buying a lot of Canadian oil
MATT LUNDY, 2/9/24

“The United States is buying Canadian oil in record quantities. In November, the U.S. imported 4.36 million barrels of Canadian crude a day, overtaking previous highs in 2019, according to figures published by the U.S. government last week,” the Globe and Mail reports. “…Canada’s heavy crude costs more to refine and thus trades at a discount to lighter U.S. crude. Before the shale boom of the 2010s, which helped the U.S. become the largest oil producer in the world, refineries there invested tens of billions of dollars upgrading their facilities to process Canadian oil more profitably. “While there’s lots of light U.S.-based crude sloshing around, they still want those heavier barrels – so they keep buying Canadian barrels and export the excess U.S. barrels,” Mr. Johnston told the Globe and Mail. As a result, Canada now accounts for 63 per cent of U.S. crude imports, close to the highest levels on record. The Canadian economy appears to be getting a boost from this demand.”

STATE UPDATES

The Lens NOLA: Formosa Plastics gets air permits back, but a few hurdles remain
Delaney Dryfoos, 2/8/24

“Longtime residents of a historically Black community called Welcome, La. are not giving a welcoming response to their potential new neighbors: a massive petrochemical complex proposed for the banks of the Mississippi River in St. James Parish,” The Lens NOLA reports. “In 2018, two miles from the proposed plant, retired schoolteacher Sharon Lavigne gathered community members in her living room in Welcome and founded RISE St. James, a faith-based environmental-justice organization… “In September 2022, her team triumphed in court… “Then, last month, on Jan. 19, the group took a real blow, when the state’s First Circuit Court of Appeal ruled in favor of LDEQ’s appeal, reversing White’s judgment. Citing the 1,200 permanent jobs promised by Formosa along with pledged job training, health screenings and beautification of a nearby park, the court decided that LDEQ had successfully balanced the pros and cons of the complex. Or as the court wrote: “DEQ is entitled to considerable deference in its conclusion that the social and economic benefits outweigh the environmental impact costs, and we cannot say that its analysis or conclusion in this regard was arbitrary and capricious or otherwise characterized by an abuse of discretion.” Contrary to the contentions of RISE St. James, the appellate court concluded that LDEQ had both complied with the federal Clean Air Act and its duty to minimize adverse environmental impacts on surrounding communities… “The plant, if built, will destroy everything she holds dear, Lavigne told the Lens. “Formosa Plastics would wipe the 5th district of St. James off the map, adding to the number of historically Black communities that have become extinct due to the intrusion of petrochemical industries.” “…Advocates believe that last month’s decision should not stand. Earthjustice and the Tulane Environmental Law Clinic have already submitted petitions to seek a rehearing of the court’s January decision to uphold the air permits granted by LDEQ.”

Denver Gazette: Colorado, Wyoming governors host carbon capture summit in Denver
Scott Weiser, 2/8/24

“The governors of Colorado and Wyoming said carbon management in Colorado and the West requires more than just controlling emissions — it also needs active carbon removal to help meet goals,” the Denver Gazette reports. “The governors spoke at a workshop this week, the third of four hosted by the Western Governors Association. The group’s chair, Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon, has made “carbon capture” his signature initiative for his term… “In his opening remarks, Gov. Jared Polis, said that point-source carbon capture can be “used to decarbonize even the heaviest industries in a very cost-effective manner — in a very efficient manner.” “Over the next two days, leaders, thought leaders, companies from across the west are going to discuss strategies for scaling up, direct air capture, building out carbon transport infrastructure, establishing storage solutions that are needed to achieve gigaton scale carbon removal,” Polis said… “Gordon, echoing Polis’ opening remarks, said the same point-source carbon capture technology being discussed at the workshop that can be used to decarbonize the waste-gas streams of hard to abate industries can just as easily be installed at coal power plants to remove CO2 from the exhaust gasses… “We can’t get there with renewables alone,” Gordon told The Denver Gazette. “And so, we’re trying to figure out across the spectrum how we can do a better job with carbon capture, whether it be direct air, whether it be point-source carbon capture — all of these things.”

Carlsbad Current-Argus: Lawmakers hope to block oil wells near homes, schools via New Mexico Senate memorial
Adrian Hedden, 2/7/24

“Democrats in the New Mexico Senate hoped to restore a push for create setbacks required for oil and gas facilities near residential neighborhoods and schools, after language to do so was stripped from a House bill that was sent for a vote of the full chamber,” the Carlsbad Current-Argus reports. “Senate Memorial 8 would request New Mexico’s Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department (ENMNRD) – the state’s lead oil and gas regulatory agency – to study the risks for people living near oil and gas facilities, consult with such “front line” communities and recommend setback legislation in the 2025 Legislative Session… “Setback language was originally included in House Bill 133, but after hearings before two committees in route to the House Floor, lawmakers removed language to require wells be drilled various distances away from homes, schools, bodies of water and other natural features. The version sent to the House Floor would still reform the Oil and Gas Act by increasing civil penalties for environmental violations by oil companies, increase bonding requirement to pay for abandoned well cleanup, and up state fees companies pay for approvals. The amendments were in response to feedback from industry and other stakeholders, but to the chagrin of environmental groups who argued the bill’s recent form no longer protected the public from pollution.”

Reuters: BP Whiting, Indiana refinery to be shut up to three weeks – Sources
2/7/24

“BP Plc plans to keep the 435,000 barrel-per-day (bpd) Whiting, Indiana refinery shut for up to three weeks for inspections of units and piping following a Feb. 1 plant-wide power outage, said people familiar with operations on Wednesday,” Reuters reports. “The inspections could be completed in as short a time as two weeks, the sources told Reuters… “Any damage discovered by the inspections could lengthen the time the refinery is shut, the sources told Reuters… “In addition to inspecting the large refining units, BP has to examine miles of piping all of which underwent significant strain when power was lost on the afternoon of Feb. 1, the sources told Reuters.”

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: As We Energies readies to close its Oak Creek coal plant, it’s planning a new gas plant on site
Karl Ebert, 2/8/24

“As it prepares to end the use of coal at its Oak Creek Power Plant, We Energies is simultaneously laying plans to build a $1.2 billion natural gas plant on the 1,000-acre Lake Michigan shoreline property,” the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports. “The company also will spend about $200 million to build a liquefied natural gas storage system on the site to assure an adequate fuel supply for the new generating plant, natural gas customers, and the eventual conversion of the nearby Elm Road Generating Station from coal to gas… “The key to the renewable energy transition is to have flexible dispatchable gas plants available for those times when the zero carbon generation just can’t meet all the need,” Dan Krueger, executive vice president for infrastructure and generation planning at We Energies’ parent company, WEC Energy Group, told the Sentinel. “They really go hand in hand, and one of the most important things to understand is that these kinds of limited-duty gas plants are a key enabler of the transition to zero carbon generation.”

EXTRACTION

CNBC: World surpasses key warming threshold across an entire year for the first time
Sam Meredith, 2/8/24

“Scientists on Thursday said the world surpassed a key warming threshold across an entire year for the first time on record,” CNBC reports. “The European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) said the global mean temperature for the 12-month period through to January was 1.52 degrees Celsius above the 1850-1900 pre-industrial average. “Rapid reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are the only way to stop global temperatures increasing,” Samantha Burgess, deputy director of C3S, said in a statement. The European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) said the global mean temperature for the 12-month period through to January was 1.52 degrees Celsius above the 1850-1900 pre-industrial average, and 0.64 degrees above the 1991-2020 average. The findings do not represent a break of the landmark Paris Agreement, which aims to “limit global warming to well below 2, preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels” over the long term. But the EU’s climate monitor said the data reinforces the need to rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions in order to avoid the worst of what the climate crisis has in store.”

Washington Post: Earth crossed 1.5C of warming this year. Here’s what to know.
Shannon Osaka, 2/8/24

“It’s official: For the past 12 months, the Earth was 1.5 degrees Celsius higher than in preindustrial times, scientists said Thursday, crossing a critical barrier into temperatures never experienced by human civilizations,” the Washington Post reports. “…But does this mean that the world’s most famous climate goal is out of reach? Not exactly… “Scientists have shown that holding the temperature rise to 1.5C could mean the survival of coral reefs, the preservation of Arctic sea ice and less deadly heat waves. Momentum has gathered around that more ambitious goal — even as carbon emissions continue to rise. Activists and environmentalists have chanted “1.5 to stay alive” and pointed out that emissions will have to be cut dramatically by 2030 to meet that target. Does this mean we have missed the 1.5C climate goal? No. There’s actually some disagreement about what exactly counts as breaching that threshold — but scientists and policymakers agree that it has to be a multiyear average, not a single 12-month period. Scientists estimate that without dramatic emissions reductions, that will happen sometime in the 2030s. But there could be other single years or 12-month periods that cross the line before then… “Most scientists say passing 1.5C is inevitable. “The 1.5-degree limit is deader than a doornail,” Columbia University climate scientist James Hansen said in a call with reporters late last year… “At this point, many experts believe that the economy is too stuck on fossil fuels to transition fast enough for 1.5 degrees… “But one thing is certain: For every tenth of a degree of warming, tipping points are more likely. Two degrees is worse than 1.9 degrees, which is worse than 1.8 degrees, and so on. And at each tenth of a degree, the infrastructure and systems that the world has built — electric grids, homes, livelihoods — will become more strained.”

Associated Press: Jury awards climate scientist Michael Mann $1 million in defamation lawsuit
SUMAN NAISHADHAM, 2/8/24

“A jury on Thursday awarded $1 million to climate scientist Michael Mann who sued a pair of conservative writers 12 years ago after they compared his depictions of global warming to a convicted child molester,” the Associated Press reports. “Mann, a professor of climate science at the University of Pennsylvania, rose to fame for a graph first published in 1998 in the journal Nature that was dubbed the “hockey stick” for its dramatic illustration of a warming planet. The work brought Mann wide exposure but also many skeptics, including the two writers Mann took to court for comments that he said affected his career and reputation in the U.S. and internationally. “It feels great,” Mann told AP Thursday after the six-person jury delivered its verdict. ”It’s a good day for us, it’s a good day for science.” In 2012, a libertarian think tank named the Competitive Enterprise Institute published a blog post by Rand Simberg, then a fellow at the organization, that compared investigations into Mann’s work to the case of Jerry Sandusky, a former assistant football coach at Penn State University who was convicted of sexually assaulting multiple children. At the time, Mann also worked at Penn State… “The jury in Superior Court of the District of Columbia found that Simberg and Steyn made false statements, awarding Mann $1 in compensatory damages from each writer. It awarded punitive damages of $1,000 from Simberg and $1 million from Steyn, after finding that the pair made their statements with “maliciousness, spite, ill will, vengeance or deliberate intent to harm.” “…On Thursday, Mann told AP he would be appealing a 2021 decision reached in D.C. Superior Court that held National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute not liable for defamation in the same incident. “We think it was wrongly decided,” Mann told AP. “They’re next.”

Canadian Press: ’Not be tolerated’: Alberta files formal response to proposed oilsands emissions cap
Bob Weber, 2/8/24

“Alberta and two prominent business groups have released formal responses to a proposed federal emissions cap as the province’s environment minister was slated to meet with her federal counterpart,” the Canadian Press reports. “This cap is not realistic or effective, will not achieve its grandiose emissions targets and will not be tolerated in Alberta,” says the province’s official response… “Guilbeault has said Ottawa would bring in a 100-megatonne cap on emissions from the oilsands, the source of nearly eight per cent of all Canadian emissions and one of the few sources that is still increasing… “Alberta’s concerns were echoed by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers and the Business Council of Alberta, a big-business lobby group. All three say an emissions cap would achieve the opposite of its intended goals. “There are other existing and proposed policies that will more effectively contribute to Canada’s long-term emission reduction goals,” wrote the association. The council said those goals are “best accomplished through a robust and transparent price on carbon.”

Reuters: California Resources to buy Aera in $2.1 bln deal to boost oil production
Sourasis Bose, 2/7/24

“California Resources said on Wednesday it would buy Aera Energy, in a deal valuing the company at $2.1 billion including debt, as the U.S. oil and gas firm looks to more than double its production,” Reuters reports. “The combined entity will own interests in five of the largest oil fields in California and its 2024 production is estimated to average 150,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day, California Resources said.”

CLIMATE FINANCE

Wall Street Journal: Dutch Pension Fund Sells Major Oil Stakes in $3 Billion Energy Divestment
Christian Moess Laursen, 2/8/24

“One of the largest pension funds in the Netherlands, PFZW, has sold all of its stakes in Shell, BP and TotalEnergies, saying they aren’t investing fast enough in the switch from fossil to low-carbon fuel,” the Wall Street Journal reports. “PFZW—which managed around $256 billion at the end of 2023—said Thursday that it sold shares to a total value of 2.8 billion euros, equivalent to around $3.02 billion, accounting for stakes in 310 companies in the oil-and-gas sector. The divestments mark the completion of a two-year engagement with companies to get them to provide verifiable transition plans that support the goal of the Paris Agreement, the fund said.”

Reuters: Dutch pension fund leading climate talks with Shell divests most oil investments
RON BOUSSO, 2/8/24

“A Dutch pension fund leading climate talks with Shell has divested its holdings in Europe’s top oil and gas companies, saying they are not moving fast enough to reduce emissions,” Reuters reports. “PFZW, which managed about €238-billion ($256-billion) at the end of 2023, said it had sold its holdings in 310 oil and gas companies – worth around €2.8-billion – after a two-year engagement programme. The companies include Shell, BP and TotalEnergies, which have set out plans to become net zero carbon emitters by 2050 as well as various short and medium-term decarbonisation targets. “During this period, dialogue with oil and gas companies was significantly intensified to encourage them to produce verifiable transition plans that support the goal of the Paris Climate Agreement,” PFZW said. “Most of our fossil fuel investments have now been sold off, as these companies have made insufficient steps in the transition to a cleaner energy mix.” PFZW, through its asset management division PGGM, will also step down as one of two pension funds leading climate negotiations with Shell since 2022 on behalf of the Climate Action 100+ (CA100+) investor group comprising $68-trillion in assets, a spokesperson said. Last year The Church of England Pensions Board, which had also led climate talks with Shell, divested its holdings in the oil company over its climate stance. In response, Shell said: “We appreciate societal perceptions in the Netherlands, but this decision has no benefit to the climate. It will not change actual use of energy and continues to portray an incorrect understanding of the needed changes to today’s energy system.”

TODAY IN GREENWASHING

Canadian Energy Centre: Whooping Crane Recovery Program Receives a Lift From Canada’s Largest Oil and Gas Producer
Will Gibson, 2/8/24

“Having flirted dangerously close with extinction in the 1940s due to habitat loss and overhunting, the whooping crane has staged something of a comeback,” according to the Canadian Energy Centre. “…And those efforts will grow after Canada’s largest oil and gas producer, Canadian Natural Resources, provided $600,000 over the next three years to support the Wilder Institute/Calgary Zoo’s whooping crane recovery program… “In addition to supporting the zoo’s whooping crane conservation work, as part of the agreement this spring members of the Wilder Institute’s animal care, health and welfare team will visit one of Canadian Natural’s oil sands mining sites in northern Alberta.”

OPINION

San Jose Mercury News: Opinion: Carbon capture in Montezuma Wetlands is a dangerous plan
Chirag Bhakta is the California director of Food & Water Watch, 2/8/24

“Last May, a Bay Area company curiously named Montezuma Wetlands submitted an application to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to build a “CarbonHub” in Solano County’s Montezuma Wetlands,” Chirag Bhakta writes for the San Jose Mercury News. “According to the proposal, the project would involve drilling a well for carbon injection and establishing an extensive expansion of submerged pipelines across San Francisco Bay. Almost immediately the project rightfully came under fire from our organization and many others due to the reality that such a venture would threaten public health, degrade the local environment and stall legitimate climate action. Indeed, carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) — the process of trapping and storing climate pollution before it enters the atmosphere — has never worked in the real world and, in an ironic twist, has mostly been embraced by major polluters who see it as a way to claim they are cleaning up their act without changing anything… “There are ample reasons to be skeptical of this scheme. For starters, CCS is an extremely expensive technology that requires significant investment and infrastructure, and there is no proven track record of it helping us reach our climate goals. In fact, most CCS projects have been total failures and the only carbon capture “successes” use the captured CO2 to get more oil out of existing wells… “Worryingly, the Montezuma project would also require a massive buildout of underwater pipelines through San Francisco Bay, from Antioch to Richmond. Further, the transportation and storage of captured carbon can lead to leaks, accidents and explosions that can result in severe health risks that often disproportionately affect communities already facing the effects of the climate crisis… “Our path forward must be focused on ending our reliance on fossil fuels and investing in clean, renewable energy systems. This means redirecting public and private funding from flawed climate scams like CCS toward proven solutions that are essential for building a sustainable and equitable future.”

Slate: Carbon Offsets Have a Fatal Flaw
GRAYSON BADGLEY, 2/8/24

“When you go to buy something off Etsy, you’re assured that “Etsy offsets carbon emissions from every delivery.” Shopify offers a program like this too. You might run into the same thing buying an airplane ticket, by being given the opportunity to purchase carbon offsets to cancel out the emissions from your flight. Southwest even lets you earn extra miles when you do this. It’s great to see companies—and by extension the public—caring more about the environmental consequences of the economy. But unfortunately, whether you’re a consumer or a corporation, buying carbon offsets is far from a foolproof way to ensure the long-term well-being of the planet,” Grayson Badgley writes for Slate. “The fact is, most of the offsets offered for sale don’t deliver on their promises. That’s because much of the system, like a house in The Three Little Pigs, is built out of sticks. Literally. There’s a good chance that your carbon-neutral flight or emission-free shipping uses trees to offset your pollution… “But the promise of using trees to counteract carbon emissions is, unfortunately, undermined by those same emissions. The warmer world we’ve created by burning fossil fuels is one where wildfires are more frequent and intense, drought is more prevalent, and forest disease more virulent. Climate change has supercharged these natural, tree-killing processes, leading to an unfortunate irony: The very forests we often depend on as offsets are under threat and increasingly endangered by climate change itself… “Collectively, fires have destroyed nearly 11 million offset credits in California’s program. But the buffer pool, meanwhile, had set aside only about 6 million credits to compensate for losses from wildfire. Even more concerning, those 6 million credits were meant to protect the program for the next 100 years. The program has literally burned through that reserve in a mere decade… “As temperatures continue to rise and the risks to forest-based offsets grow, it’s clear that California’s forest offsets program is all but insolvent… “We need to do more than plant trees and promise not to cut trees down. Protecting the world’s forests requires that we immediately and permanently stop adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. It’s our responsibility to do the hard work of curtailing carbon pollution, as that’s the only way to ensure that the trees and forests that we love can survive.”

Jacobin Magazine: Canada’s Carbon Emissions Cover-Up
JEREMY APPEL, 2/8/24

“It may be unsurprising to learn that Canada’s oil and gas industry has been self-servingly underestimating carbon emissions from the tar sands, but the sheer scale of deception is stunning,” Jeremy Appel writes for Jacobin Magazine. “According to a scientific study that’s been in the works over the past six years, emissions from the tar sands in northeastern Alberta are anywhere from 1,900 percent to 6,300 percent greater than what the industry has self-reported. These findings directly contradict the Canadian government’s claim that tar sands oil, which requires a much more intensive process to extract crude oil from a mixture of water, sands, and heavy hydrocarbons, is no more emissions-intensive than any other type of oil… ​​“I suppose ‘Holy s***’ isn’t printable,” Greenpeace Canada’s Keith Stewart told the Independent. At the same time, Stewart noted that the findings of the study, which also looked at the emissions’ impacts of air, water, land, and wildlife, would come as no surprise to nearby indigenous communities, who have been sounding the alarm on the negative public health impact of the tar sands for decades to no avail… “Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has publicly committed to combating climate change and advancing reconciliation with indigenous peoples, making these issues a key part of his brand. He has fallen short on both fronts… “The federal government is currently developing a cap on oil and gas emissions… “The true scale of the industry’s environmental toll should make any weakening of the regulations a nonstarter. But resisting industry pressure isn’t enough. The federal government needs to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for the damage they’ve caused to the people and planet — and make them pay up.”

The Hill: Biden’s LNG decision will make it harder to reach our climate goals
Mary Landrieu (D-La.) served in the U.S. Senate from 1997 to 2015. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) represented Ohio’s 13th congressional district from 2003 to 2023. The two are co-chairs of Natural Allies for a Clean Energy Future, 2/8/24

“China is orchestrating a massive investment in solar and wind power to meet its growing energy needs, installing as much renewable energy capacity as the rest of the world combined, six years ahead of schedule. However, this impressive success story masks an ugly truth: Without natural gas as a foundation, this renewable power is inextricably linked with rapidly expanding coal-burning in order to ensure grid reliability, which is creating more harm than good for our climate,” Mary Landrieu and Tim Ryan write for The Hill. “…As Democrats supporting President Biden, we are aligned with the imperative to reverse climate change quickly with bold action, including ramping up investments in renewables and clean energy… “But low-carbon natural gas must be part of the equation too, both here at home and exported abroad. That’s why Biden’s recent actions to halt LNG approvals is so disappointing… “Shrill and impractical voices in this debate have long blatantly ignored these realities, dishonestly attempting to force a false binary choice of renewables or fossil fuels upon a complex debate over geopolitics, economics, and climate. Young people absorbing their misinformation need to understand the future risks of the policies they are advocating… “If they had their way in ending natural gas use, many economies, including the U.S., would need to burn more and more coal to keep the lights on — moving us backward on climate — no matter how many wind and solar panels we install. The value of natural gas is backed up by leading and trusted scientific experts like former Obama administration Energy Secretary Ernie Moniz, who has said natural gas should be viewed “as a multi-decadal, critical component of the energy transition.” “…We urge his administration to rethink this counterproductive policy, which not only sets back our climate agenda, but also undermines his strong record of rebuilding American jobs and manufacturing.”

The Hill: Biden’s misguided LNG pause follows Carter’s path to a one-term presidency
Oliver McPherson-Smith, Ph.D., is the director of the Center for Energy & Environment at the America First Policy Institute and a research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, 2/7/24

“President Biden’s recent pause on new permits for liquified natural gas (LNG) exports is foolish policy. Unfortunately, these types of misguided export restrictions are not unprecedented. At this exact point in his presidency, Jimmy Carter similarly implemented a half-measure ban on grain exports to the Soviet Union,” Oliver McPherson-Smith writes for The Hill. “Carter’s grain embargo should be an ominous warning for President Biden: Not only did it fail to achieve its objective of forcing a Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, but it also antagonized American agricultural communities and drove an aggressive swing toward Ronald Reagan in the 1980 election… “Fast forward 44 years, President Biden’s pause on LNG export permits is set to replicate Carter’s folly. According to the Biden administration, the pause on approving additional LNG permits is driven by the risks of exacerbating climate change. Like Carter’s embargo, this permit pause will not achieve its objective. Punitive measures to restrict the clean production of American oil and gas typically incentivize a shift toward less efficient alternatives… “Meanwhile, the permitting pause will do little to rein in China’s prolific emissions… “Just as President Carter failed to rally the international community to sacrifice their own prosperity, so too will President Biden. This time, however, rather than American allies, it will be countries like Russia and Iran that gleefully seek to fill any global demand for gas that they can seize.”

The Hill: Why the US pause on natural gas exports is a win for consumers  
Clark Williams-Derry is an IEEFA energy finance analyst, 2/6/24

“The announcement that the Biden administration will pause approvals for new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facilities is welcome news to local communities fighting these projects. But consumers across the country should be breathing a sigh of relief as well,” Clark Williams-Derry writes for The Hill. “…This LNG boom has been welcomed by the oil and gas industry, but it hid a dirty secret: As the nation increases gas exports, U.S. gas consumers face higher and more volatile utility bills. This isn’t just theoretical. It’s already happened. After Russia began manipulating Europe’s gas markets in late 2021, the continent turned to LNG to fill the shortfalls. A global bidding war for American LNG lasted for more than a year. LNG exporters bought all the gas they could handle, U.S. gas stockpiles dwindled, and wholesale gas prices spiked to their highest levels in more than a decade… “Gas utilities passed on the higher costs to their customers, causing real pain for families who use gas to heat homes and cook food. Higher prices hit businesses and industries, making it harder and costlier to keep the lights on, since power generators rely so heavily on gas. Higher energy costs filtered throughout the economy, boosting inflation. This is a story that the gas industry wants to hide. But the economics are simple: Shipping more gas overseas can leave less gas for consumers here… “A pause in new approvals is needed to thoroughly consider the effects of these projects on consumers, local communities, and on the climate. The vast LNG industry has already created havoc for U.S. gas consumers. Once the current round of expansions is finished, LNG exports are slated to almost double, exposing consumers to even more price volatility.”

The Conversation: Biden’s ‘hard look’ at liquefied natural gas exports raises a critical question: How does natural gas fit with US climate goals?
Emily Grubert, associate professor of sustainable energy policy at the University of Notre Dame and a former official at the U.S. Department of Energy, 2/7/24

“The Biden administration has frozen pending decisions on permit applications to export liquefied natural gas, or LNG, to countries other than U.S. free trade partners,” Emily Grubert writes for The Conversation. “…Environmental advocates, who have expressed alarm over the rapid growth of U.S. LNG exports and their effects on Earth’s climate, praised this step. Critics, including energy companies and members of Congress, argue that it threatens European energy security and energy jobs in the U.S… “LNG is not a transition away from fossil fuel – it is a fossil fuel. Hypothetically, substituting LNG for more carbon-intensive fuels, like coal or other natural gas supplies with higher methane emissions, could help reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the near term. But there’s debate over how much LNG is actually useful in that context, especially when it comes to whether LNG would actually prompt switching from coal to gas, and if so, whether the long-term lock-in of fossil gas use is worth it. Meanwhile, investing in new LNG infrastructure means either committing to operate these facilities for years, or planning to strand expensive assets by retiring them early. LNG terminals also have significant local impacts. In addition to methane, they emit large quantities of other air pollutants, including nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds. Tanker traffic to and from them can damage marshes and waterways. Building more terminals, especially in areas where energy facilities are already concentrated, raises important health and environmental justice concerns… “In my view, it’s not clear that deploying LNG will achieve this goal unless it’s done with an explicit plan and mechanism to ensure that the gas is only used where it is actually needed and can support an emissions phaseout… “I’d like to see a clear articulation of the climate, health and energy system impacts of approving additional LNG export terminals, with enforcement mechanisms in place to ensure that the U.S. will meet defined limits on climate and other pollution, and on operational conditions. I’d also like to see health and environmental justice considerations deeply embedded into energy and climate decisions in general, and especially for LNG projects. These plants are sited mainly in communities that have suffered high rates of illness, premature deaths and environmental damage from hosting fossil fuel infrastructure for decades. Many of them have said they don’t want additional LNG development. In my view, without clarity on where the U.S. is going on this issue, it will be extremely difficult to make good decisions about LNG, and about natural gas in general.”