EXTRACTED: Daily News Clips 4/26/24

PIPELINE NEWS

• Des Moines Register: Iowa regulators reject call to consolidate pipeline permits, saying it would delay project

• Iowa Capital Dispatch: Regulators deny late requests to delay carbon dioxide pipeline decision

• KCRG: ‘Cutting the whole farm in half’: Farmer frustrated Iowa not passing eminent domain protections

• Public News Service: Landmark NE agreement takes proactive approach to CO2 pipeline risks

• Bloomberg: Make or Break Moment for US Carbon Capture [VIDEO]

• Traverse City Record Eagle: Enbridge Line 5: Environmental groups to appeal tunnel approval

• Wausau Pilot and Review: ‘Route 51’ to go behind scenes of documentary ‘Bad River,’ oil pipeline debate

• Press release: Village of New Paltz Votes Against Pipeline Expansion

• Forbes: FERC Pipeline Dispute Has Big Implications For The Future

WASHINGTON UPDATES

• Heatmap: The New EPA Power Plant Rules Are Out — and Could Change the Calculus for Gas

• E&E News: Specter of Supreme Court smackdown looms over Biden climate rule

• E&E News: 3 energy questions hang over EPA’s carbon rule

• Food & Water Watch: EPA Rules Endorse Failed Carbon Capture Technologies 

• InsideEPA: EPA Readies Methane Reporting Rule Amid Suits Over Oil & Gas Standards 

• E&E News: Interior Alumni Eye Return For A Second Trump Term 

STATE UPDATES

• Oil and Gas Watch: In Illinois, a massive taxpayer-funded carbon capture project fails to capture about 90 percent of plant’s emissions

• Colorado Sun: Colorado apartment owners sue to block Denver and state carbon-cut laws they find crushing  

• WyoFile: Feds reject plan to pump Moneta oilfield waste into potential drinking water

• Colorado Public Radio: An oil industry-backed measure just qualified for the November ballot. It could be the first of many

EXTRACTION

• LMT Online: Environmental fallout from BP disaster ever so slowly coming into focus

• USC Dornsife: Can carbon capture solve climate change?

TODAY IN GREENWASHING

• The Sault Star: TC Energy, Brookfield Renewables, and Evolugen pitch in for the purchase of pickup to fight remote wildfires

OPINION

• Government Accountability Project: U.S. Military Planes “Crop Dusted the Workers” During BP Oil Spill Clean Up
  

PIPELINE NEWS

Des Moines Register: Iowa regulators reject call to consolidate pipeline permits, saying it would delay project
Donnelle Eller, 4/26/24

“In a 2-1 decision, Iowa regulators Thursday rejected efforts to force Summit Carbon Solutions to consolidate 15 permit requests that make up the Ames company’s proposal to build an $8 billion carbon capture pipeline across Iowa and other nearby states,” the Des Moines Register reports. “…Opponents moved last month to require Summit to consolidate its hazardous liquid pipeline permit requests, saying the lateral pipelines to POET and Valero ethanol plants involve many of the same participants, are part of the same project, and pose the same legal issues.

The Sierra Club’s Iowa Chapter and the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation also asked the utilities board to reopen the record on Summit’s pipeline proposal, which had been closed after an eight-week hearing last fall. The Farm Bureau raised technical questions about the size of the new pipeline trunks, pressure changes and valve and pump station locations… “In an order Thursday written by board members Erik Helland and Sarah Martz, the three-member panel denied the groups’ requests, saying that while there may be overlapping parties in the proceedings, the landowners likely will not be the same. The order also said the legal questions are different enough to warrant separate dockets. The board “finds it to be unlikely that consolidation would expedite or simplify consideration of the issues involved… “The board said consolidating the permit requests would harm Summit’s rights as well as the rights of landowners currently not part of the case… “Critics have voiced concerns about pipeline safety and the project’s impact on farmland and drainage tiles under fields and have objected to Summit’s proposed use of eminent domain to force unwilling landowners to sell the company access to their property. “How dare the IUB say ‘Summit Carbon’s substantial rights would be impacted?'” Kim Junker, a landowner who opposes the pipeline, told the Register. “This is a slap in the face to every Iowan (whose) constitutional property rights have been violated for the last three years.” “…In addition, the board on Thursday denied the Sierra Club’s request to stay action on the additional permit requests until the original permit is decided.”

Iowa Capital Dispatch: Regulators deny late requests to delay carbon dioxide pipeline decision
JARED STRONG, 4/25/24

“In a split vote, the Iowa Utilities Board declined to solicit more evidence before it decides whether to issue a pipeline permit to Summit Carbon Solutions, according to a Thursday board order,” the Iowa Capital Dispatch reports. “In recent months, the company has more than doubled the number of ethanol producers to which its system would connect and added 340 miles of pipe — a roughly 50% increase. It indicated in March it would file 14 new permit requests for that expansion with the IUB while its initial permit application was still pending. The IUB is poised to make a decision for the first permit, and pipeline opponents seized on the expansion to make an 11th-hour bid to delay the decision. The Sierra Club of Iowa argued that the evidentiary record should be reopened and the permit applications consolidated, which would potentially elongate the process for many months. The Iowa Farm Bureau Federation did not ask for a consolidation but sought to reopen the record to determine how the expansion will affect the initial proposal. Board member Joshua Byrnes agreed with the Farm Bureau: “The board should demand that the route for a project of this size and magnitude be the product of comprehensive planning to ensure the final route is the most efficient to accomplish the project’s objectives and to minimize the impact on Iowa landowners… Because the company voluntarily chose to open the door to the expanded ethanol plant partners, I believe it is fair to at least ask about the potential impact the additional trunk and lateral pipelines may have on the proposed pipeline,” Byrnes wrote in his dissent Thursday… “All three board members denied the request to consolidate the permit applications.”

KCRG: ‘Cutting the whole farm in half’: Farmer frustrated Iowa not passing eminent domain protections
Conner Hendricks, 4/24/24

“Landowners in roughly one third of Iowa are waiting to see if Summit Carbon Solutions will be given permission to build a carbon sequestration pipeline through their land. 75% of landowners have signed voluntary agreements with Summit to allow access, but the company may use eminent domain to allow it to force access for the rest,” KCRG reports. “House lawmakers passed a bill to make private use of eminent domain more difficult, but senate Republicans refused to take up the bill. Kathy Stockdale’s family has farmed their land in Iowa Falls for more than a hundred years… “The proposed Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline will run through her farm. “It will be going all the way down to the road down there and then it will be cutting the whole farm in half all the way down to where our wetlands down at the next road,” Stockdale told KCRG. She’s opposed to the pipeline. “I’m fighting for my property rights. I believe God gave us this land to take care of and with that comes those property rights, and if we lose property rights, we lose all control over anything and everything we want to do on our farms,” Stockdale told KCRG… “Most recently, a bill by State Rep. Charley Thomson of Charles City would allow landowners and pipeline companies to go to court to ask whether the use of eminent domain was constitutional and benefited the public. “Land is the original asset in Iowa. It’s in our souls. An unjust taking of land without remedy is not only irritating, it’s outrageous,” Thomson told KCRG… “As a Republican, and as an Iowan, it bothers me tremendously that only three or four senators can stop any legislation from going through,” Stockdale told KCRG… “Stockdale told KCRG she has a little more faith in legislation being passed next year, and she and other landowners are also looking at their legal options through the courts.”

Public News Service: Landmark NE agreement takes proactive approach to CO2 pipeline risks
Deborah Van Fleet, 4/26/24

“CO2 pipelines are on the increase in the United States, and like all pipelines, they come with risks. Preparing for those risks is a major focus of the Community Benefits Agreement between Nebraska-based Bold Alliance and Tallgrass Energy Solutions,” Public News Service reports. “Tallgrass plans to modify an existing gas pipeline that crosses Nebraska to transport CO2. Bold Alliance Director Jane Kleeb told PNS her organization stands with communities facing energy infrastructure projects, to help ensure they have what they need and that the company is giving back. She pointed to Satartia, Mississippi’s 2020 experience with a massive CO2 pipeline leak as evidence of the importance of first-responder training. “We have real money in here,” she told PNS, “$400,000 initially, and then an additional $200,000 for training and $100,000 for an emergency response system that first responders will get, to equip their mostly-volunteer firefighters.” Not only did the Mississippi first responders lack the training for a CO2 disaster, Kleeb told PNS, but some were unaware the pipeline even existed. Tallgrass has said it will conduct yearly training for first responders in the 10-county area, and send yearly notices to all landowners along the route. Kleeb told PNS she expects the firefighter training to begin within the next few months… “Although CO2 pipelines cover more than 5,000 miles in the United States and continue to be built, Kleeb told PNS federal regulations aren’t yet in place. “For folks listening, you may be, like, ‘What do you mean they don’t have regulations in place?’ And that’s what we’ve been saying for the last few years: We need regulations in place,” she told PNS. “No pipeline will go into operation in our state until those regulations are finished, and Tallgrass then knows the type of safety valves and other things they have to put in place to be in compliance.” “…Another provision in the Community Benefits Agreement is annual royalty payments, which Kleeb calls a “significant win” for Nebraska landowners. “Landowners are now going to be getting 10 cents per metric ton that is sequestered of the carbon,” she told PNS. “So, that could be up to $1 million every year that will go back to landowners in the path of this pipeline.” Kleeb told PNS no pipeline companies in the Midwest currently pay landowners a royalty for use of their land.”

Bloomberg: Make or Break Moment for US Carbon Capture [VIDEO]
4/23/24

“The US is the undisputed leader in carbon capture and storage (CCS) and is poised to maintain this position, thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,” according to Bloomberg. “More than 167 million tons of capture capacity is expected to come online by 2035, representing more than $30 billion in investment. But the market has reached a tipping point. Regulatory setbacks are causing delays and cancellations for announced projects. Attention from environmental activists is making both emitters and lenders wary of the technology. What does the US need to do to maintain its momentum and its leadership in CCS? What is the role of both the public and private sectors in overcoming permitting obstacles? Can another country or region steal the top spot? Kelly Cummins, Acting Director, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, US Department of Energy (confirmed); Lee Blank, CEO, Summit Carbon Solutions; Claude Letourneau, CEO, Svante; Erika Chan, Head of Sustainability, US Steel.”

Traverse City Record Eagle: Enbridge Line 5: Environmental groups to appeal tunnel approval
Peter Kobs, 4/25/24

“A coalition of environmental groups will file a legal appeal on May 9 to prevent the construction of an Enbridge Inc. tunnel under the Straits of Mackinac,” the Traverse City Record Eagle reports. “…The announcement was made Wednesday evening in Traverse City at a public seminar called “Tunnel Vision: A Masterclass in Rejecting the Line 5 Oil Tunnel.” More than 150 people attended the standing-room-only event in the Alluvion performance space at 414 E. Eighth. “I can’t tell you the exact wording of the appeal now, but it will leverage the state’s MEPA (Michigan Environmental Protection Act) law, especially protections against methane releases into the environment,” said Denise Keele, director of the Michigan Climate Action Network. The appeal will be used to counter a Dec. 1, 2023, decision by the Michigan Public Service Commission that gave qualified approval for the tunnel plan… “Keele’s group MiCAN, a statewide network of 50 organizations, is leading the appeal process. Other advocacy groups involved include Oil & Water Don’t Mix, the Groundwork Center (formerly the Michigan Land Use Institute) and the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians.”

Wausau Pilot and Review: ‘Route 51’ to go behind scenes of documentary ‘Bad River,’ oil pipeline debate
Shereen Siewert, 4/25/24

“The battle between the Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians in northwestern Wisconsin and Enbridge over an oil pipeline that runs through tribal land has been the subject of significant debate and legal controversy for more than a decade. A new documentary, released this month, features dozens of interviews with tribal leaders and officials, who share their perspective on the conflict,” the Wausau Pilot and Review reports. “Bad River,” directed by Mary Mazzio and narrated by Quannah Chasinghorse and Edward Norton, features interviews with dozens of Bad River Band members and tribal leaders to tell the story of the land, its people and their resistance to Line 5. At 10 a.m. April 26, “Route 51” host Shereen Siewert welcomes Mazzio for a behind-the-scenes look at the film and the issues surrounding the ongoing battle against Line 5.”

Press release: Village of New Paltz Votes Against Pipeline Expansion
4/25/24

“On April 10, at the bi-weekly Village Board Meeting, New Paltz trustees voted in favor of a resolution to urge Gov. Kathy Hochul to oppose the Iroquois Pipeline Expansion. Drafted by Deputy Mayor Alexandria Wojcik, the resolution directly addresses the environmental risks of an increase in fracked gas that the pipeline expansion poses, specifically the compression systems that the company, Iroquois Gas Transmission System L.P., have proposed in Athens, N.Y., Dover, N.Y., Brookfield, Conn., and Milford, Conn.. The resolution also declares the expansion to be in direct violation of New York State’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA). The act, signed into law in 2019, outlines New York’s goals to “reduce statewide greenhouse gas emissions by 85% by 2050 and establish net zero emissions in all sectors of the economy.” “The Village of New Paltz has always been an environmental leader, standing up and speaking out when maybe more frontline impacted communities aren’t as able to,” said Wojcik, who has been a major voice throughout this effort. “[The pipeline’s expansion] goes against the spirit of our fracking ban and actively works against the goals of the CLCPA. We must put an end to fracked gas infrastructure and focus on our green energy future.”

Forbes: FERC Pipeline Dispute Has Big Implications For The Future
David Blackmon, 4/25/24

“It isn’t often we see any company in the oil and gas business actively seeking enhanced regulatory oversight by the federal government, but it’s happening in a pipeline-related case in Louisiana and Texas,” Forbes reports. “On April 8, Energy Transfer petitioned the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) requesting that it assume authority related to the Louisiana Energy Gateway (LEG) natural gas pipeline under construction by fellow major pipeliner Williams Company. Energy Transfer’s petition urges FERC to regulate the LEG as an interstate pipeline, claiming that it crosses state lines between Texas and Louisiana, and that it also meets the Commission’s 6-factor test of physical characteristics used to determine whether a given project is an interstate transmission system or a gathering system that would more appropriately fall under state regulatory control. Typically, whenever a pipeline is contained within a single state, FERC would stay out of it, leaving jurisdiction to state regulators like the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources (LDNR) and the Texas Railroad Commission (TRRC). So, the key in this dispute between the two pipeline giants is the fact that the system would cross the state line between Louisiana and Texas, which is not surprising given that the LEG is designed to move gas produced from the Haynesville region, which straddles the same state line, and deliver the gas into the Williams-owned Transco Interstate Pipeline system… “For the industry as a whole, FERC’s decision related to Energy Transfer’s petition could become a landmark that drives future pipeline design and investment decisions. Until now, the distinction between FERC-regulated interstate pipeline systems and state jurisdiction intrastate gathering systems has been fairly straightforward. Depending on which way the FERC commissioners rule in this case, reaching that distinction could become significantly more complicated in the future.”

WASHINGTON UPDATES

Heatmap: The New EPA Power Plant Rules Are Out — and Could Change the Calculus for Gas
EMILY PONTECORVO, 4/25/24

“Utilities all over the country have proposed to build a slew of new natural gas-fired power plants in recent months, citing an anticipated surge in electricity demand from data centers, manufacturing, and electric vehicles. But on Thursday, the Environmental Protection Agency finalized new emissions limits on power plants that throw many of those plans into question,” Heatmap reports. “The rules require that newly built natural gas plants that are designed to help meet the grid’s daily, minimum needs, will have to slash their carbon emissions by 90% by 2032, an amount that can only be achieved with the use of carbon capture equipment. But carbon capture will be cost-prohibitive in many cases — especially in the Southeast, where much of that expected demand growth is concentrated, but which lacks the geology necessary to store captured carbon underground. “With this rule, it’s kind of back to square one,” Tyler Norris, an electric power systems researcher, told Heatmap. “I think most likely, you’re gonna see the regulators really push back and call upon them to redo all their modeling.” “…The two other biggest changes the agency made between the proposed and final rules were to push forward and shorten the timeline for coal plant compliance, and to lower the threshold determining how many natural gas plants have to meet the toughest standard — which means more plants will have to control their emissions.”

E&E News: Specter of Supreme Court smackdown looms over Biden climate rule
Niina H. Farah, Lesley Clark, Pamela King, 4/26/24

“Before EPA can crack down on the nation’s second-largest source of climate pollution, the agency must survive the scrutiny of one of its most powerful critics — the conservative-dominated Supreme Court,” E&E News reports. “Republicans are already declaring that EPA’s rule to limit power plant pollution — issued Thursday — fails to conform to the high court’s West Virginia v. EPA ruling. That 2022 decision invalidated the Obama administration’s attempt to shift the electric grid to renewable sources and restricted the federal government’s power to write expensive and politically divisive regulations. West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey has already vowed to challenge the Biden rule in court and predicted he’d score a repeat victory against what he called an “out-of-control agency.” Morrisey — a Republican who convinced the Supreme Court in West Virginia to scrap the Obama-era Clean Power Plan — told E&E the new rule is designed to put coal plants out of business by setting standards facilities can’t meet. “This tactic by the EPA is unacceptable, and this rule flies in the face of the rule of law,” Morrisey told E&E. “We are confident this new rule is not going to be upheld.” “…Critics of the rule rebuked EPA’s new approach as a more covert way to shift the power sector away from fossil fuels… “EPA Administrator Michael Regan said Thursday that he’s confident the agency’s new regulations will withstand legal scrutiny. “We have spent time ensuring that each path taken is durable,” Regan told reporters before the rules were released. “We are measuring twice and cutting once and learning from past actions and past results.” “…But legal observers told E&E the new rule’s focus on facility-level carbon emissions may save the regulation from the pitfalls the Clean Power Plan encountered in the 2022 case.”

E&E News: 3 energy questions hang over EPA’s carbon rule
Jason Plautz, Carlos Anchondo, Christian Robles, Jeffrey Tomich, 4/26/24

“EPA’s final emissions rule is renewing questions about the readiness of carbon capture technology for power plants and the ability of utilities to comply with new restrictions at a time of surging electricity demand,” E&E News reports. “…The rule, which is likely to face legal challenges, states that power producers can rely on carbon capture and storage (CCS) to comply. The Biden administration touted the standards as a way to slash harmful emissions while encouraging utilities to invest in new technology. But many companies that will have to comply had a different view. Edison Electric Institute President Dan Brouillette, whose group represents utilities, told E&E the association is concerned that carbon capture “is not yet ready for full-scale, economy-wide deployment” and that there is not enough time to build the necessary infrastructure to support transportation and storage of captured emissions… “Here are three questions that will determine how EPA’s carbon rule is implemented: Is carbon capture ready for power plants? To date, CCS has been concentrated on ethanol and natural gas processing plants in the United States, rather than the power sector… “Globally, there are two power plants with carbon capture in China and one in Canada, according to the Global CCS Institute, which supports the industry. That revives questions about whether the technology has been adequately proven and if projects can reliably capture 90 percent of CO2 emissions. Among the challenges for the technology with power plants are high capture costs and a need for more pipelines to carry captured gas to storage sites. EPA “relies on some very contestable assumptions of cost reductions and high capture rates, both have been disproven by multiple researchers in this field,” Lorenzo Sani, an analyst on the power and utilities team at the think tank Carbon Tracker, told E&E. EEI’s Brouillette, former Energy Department secretary in the Trump administration, told E&E that “while CCS and other 24/7 clean energy technologies could be important tools for reducing emissions in the future, EPA’s record does not support a finding that CCS is demonstrated today.”

Food & Water Watch: EPA Rules Endorse Failed Carbon Capture Technologies 
4/25/24

“Today, the EPA unveiled its long-awaited power plant emissions rules. As expected, existing gas-fired plants are excluded, and the proposal relies heavily on so-called carbon capture technologies that have so far been a dramatic and expensive failure,” according to Food & Water Watch. “Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter issued the following statement in response: “For years, the dirty energy industry has promoted carbon capture as a solution to the climate crisis. But billions of dollars have been wasted trying to make this flawed technology work. The EPA’s new rulemaking once again claims that carbon capture is an effective means of reducing climate pollution, even though it has never worked in the real world. “The Biden administration must take aggressive actions outside of this rulemaking to rein in fossil fuels – primarily by using existing federal authority to halt new drilling and fracking, and stop new fossil fuel infrastructure like power plants, pipelines and export terminals. Pretending that carbon capture can dramatically reduce climate pollution is nothing but a dangerous fantasy.”

InsideEPA: EPA Readies Methane Reporting Rule Amid Suits Over Oil & Gas Standards 
4/24/24

“EPA is poised to release its final rule updating greenhouse gas reporting requirements for the oil and gas sector, after methane detection firms and others offered late-hour pitches on the details of a rule that will be crucial in determining how much companies will pay under the Inflation Reduction Act’s methane fee,” InsideEPA reports. “The reporting rule comes as litigation is heating up over EPA’s methane emissions standards for the sector. And, an Energy Department (DOE) advisory group is floating policy options to further curb methane and carbon dioxide from the gas industry, amid projections that the sector is not on track to slash enough emissions.”

E&E News: Interior Alumni Eye Return For A Second Trump Term 
Michael Doyle, 4/24/24

“A Trump administration Interior Department 2.0 — if it happens — could well turn out to be a reboot of the original,” E&E News reports. “Particularly at the department’s upper levels, Interior veterans of the first Trump administration are being cited by their former colleagues and others with skin in the game as strong potential candidates to serve again, if former President Donald Trump wins against President Joe Biden in November. “I think there are going to be a lot of familiar faces that will want to go back,” Cole Rojewski, Interior’s congressional liaison between 2019 and 2021, told E&E. “I think a lot of people enjoyed their experience in the Trump administration.” Many remain hesitant to publicly fess up to specific Interior ambitions right now. But in interviews with former Trump administration officials, Capitol Hill veterans, GOP-connected lobbyists and others, a number of names keep popping up. Those among the frequently mentioned range from former Interior Secretary David Bernhardt down to other political appointees now leading agencies in Republican-led states.” 

STATE UPDATES

Oil and Gas Watch: In Illinois, a massive taxpayer-funded carbon capture project fails to capture about 90 percent of plant’s emissions
Brendan Gibbons, 4/25/24

“Last year, the Department of Energy’s National Energy Technology Laboratory celebrated what it called “the largest demonstration of its kind in the United States” at an ethanol plant in Decatur, Illinois, where carbon dioxide (CO2) is being captured and permanently stored deep underground,” Oil and Gas Watch reports. “The project, a partnership among ethanol producer Archer Daniels Midland, oilfield service company Schlumberger, the Illinois State Geological Survey, and Richland Community College, received $281 million in taxpayer dollars via Department of Energy grants. According to the department, it has stored more than 2.8 million metric tons of CO2 since 2011; EPA records put the figure at 3.94 million metric tons. In a January 2023 article, Energy Department officials said the project “marks a crucial step forward in efforts to decarbonize the U.S. economy and power sector by 2050.” However, EPA records also show that the plant over the last decade has captured only 10-12 percent of the plant’s emissions each year at most, allowing the rest of the carbon dioxide to escape into the atmosphere. This raises questions about whether industrial-scale carbon capture technology can be a meaningful solution to global warming… “William Burns, founding co-director of the Institute for Carbon Removal Law and Policy at American University, noted that even the modest amount of CO2 stored at the ADM plant in Illinois was only achieved with the help of massive taxpayer subsidies. “We’ve been providing these subsidies for a long time – billions and billions of taxpayer dollars – and we still have very little to show for it,” Burns told OGW… “Companies are planning to deploy the same technology in use at ADM’s Decatur plant across the U.S. A report last week by the Congressional Research Service shows that there are 130 pending applications nationwide to drill carbon disposal wells for permanent geologic storage of CO2. Another 33 applications are under review in Louisiana, North Dakota, and Texas, where the EPA has given the states authority to issue permits. However, few examples of large-scale industrial CO2 storage projects currently exist. Of the 13 carbon capture projects that reported to EPA in 2022, a majority – seven plants – injected captured CO2 back into the ground for enhanced oil recovery. Four injected carbon into the ground with waste produced by gas processing plants as a waste disposal method. Only two plants (including the ADM plant) were not part of the oil and gas industry, and injected CO2 into the ground for permanent sequestration. The other is the Red Trail Energy biofuel plant in Stark, North Dakota… “The small percentage of carbon captured by ADM undercuts the argument that industrial carbon capture can have a significant impact on global warming. Skeptics describe carbon capture as a false solution that will never be deployed on a big enough scale to meaningfully reduce CO2 emissions. Former Vice President Al Gore, for example, called carbon capture technology a “fraud” during an April 12 speech to environmentalists.”

Colorado Sun: Colorado apartment owners sue to block Denver and state carbon-cut laws they find crushing  
Michael Booth, 4/25/24

“A group of Colorado’s largest building owners and managers sued in federal court Monday to block separate greenhouse gas reduction rules passed by Denver and Colorado governments, arguing the rules illegally go beyond federal guidelines in requiring costly building renovations to cut carbon,” the Colorado Sun reports. “If Denver and Colorado rules on retrofitting older buildings are allowed to take effect, rents will rise sharply for all multifamily residents and hotel guests and worsen the affordable housing stock shortage for lower-income Coloradans, according to the U.S. District Court for Colorado lawsuit by the Colorado Apartment Association, the Colorado Hotel and Lodging Association and others. The building owners and managers asked the federal judge to declare the Denver and Colorado rules preempted by the federal Energy and Policy Conservation Act and therefore unenforceable, and to permanently block state and local government from implementing the rules.”

WyoFile: Feds reject plan to pump Moneta oilfield waste into potential drinking water
Angus M. Thuermer Jr., 4/25/24

“Federal environmental officials have rejected a request by Aethon Energy to pump Moneta Divide oilfield wastewater into the Madison aquifer, saying the deep reservoir could be used for drinking water, especially by tribal nations on the Wind River Indian Reservation,” WyoFile reports. “The Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission in November 2020 approved wastewater disposal into the 15,000-foot deep well, but the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said last week the state’s decision did not align with federal rules. Aethon’s plan does not support a finding “that the aquifer cannot now and will not in the future serve as a source of drinking water,” the EPA wrote in a 20-page record of decision. Aethon argued, and the Wyoming commission agreed 4-1, that the underground Madison formation was too deep and remote to be used for drinking water. The EPA relied on the Safe Drinking Water Act as the authority under which to protect the aquifer. It also cited climate, environmental justice and tribal interests in its decision, pointing to the nearby Wind River Indian Reservation as a community that could use the water… “We have to make sure our future generations have a reliable source of clean water,” Wes Martel, a member of the Wind River Water Resources Control Board, told WyoFIle. “Our reservation, this is all we have left. We’ve got to do our best to protect it.” The Powder River Basin Resource Council, along with the Wyoming Outdoor Council and others, has spent years monitoring discharge reports and industry permits and was vital in challenging pollution threats, Martel told WyoFile.”

Colorado Public Radio: An oil industry-backed measure just qualified for the November ballot. It could be the first of many
Sam Brasch, 4/24/24

“A political group financed by Colorado’s largest oil and gas companies has successfully submitted enough signatures to earn a spot on the November ballot for a measure backers say would boost economic transparency,” Colorado Public Radio reports. “If approved, Proposed Initiative 77 would require all future ballot measures to appear below an extensive economic impact statement, which must include the estimated effect on jobs, state and local tax revenue and the overall state gross domestic product. The Colorado Secretary of State’s Office on Monday announced the backers had collected enough signatures to qualify for the ballot. The development marks the latest example of the fossil fuel industry turning to Colorado’s ballot process to advance its policy goals. Campaign finance records show the main group backing the measure, Protect Colorado, is leading an issue committee funded with millions from Chevron Energy, Occidental Petroleum Company and other smaller oil and gas companies operating in Colorado… “The potential initiative, however, could pack future ballot measures with statistics the oil and gas industry often wields in fights against environmental groups and climate-minded lawmakers. If approved, the measure would require the legislature’s chief economists to review potential economic impact statements submitted by “any interested party.” Within five days, the economist must write a summary with a range of all the qualifying statements.” 

EXTRACTION

LMT Online: Environmental fallout from BP disaster ever so slowly coming into focus
Chris Gray, 4/24/24

“Almost a decade and a half after the April 2010 Deepwater Horizon blowout, offshore oil production in the Gulf of Mexico has long since surpassed pre-disaster levels. The hundreds of fish species in what had been one of the world’s richest and most biodiverse marine environments haven’t been nearly as lucky,” LMT Online reports. “In April 2020, a study published in the scientific journal Nature detected oil in every last one of the 2,000 fish that had been tested. Now, a joint study by researchers at Louisiana State and Tulane universities, reported last week by phys.org, found that 29 of the 78 fish species endemic to the Gulf region, or 37 percent, had not been found in the natural-history collections of participating museums since 2010… “We are far from the beginning of the end for the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill,” the researchers wrote. “Lingering chemicals, lost generations of wildlife and a continued ecosystem imbalance may all be factors that prevent an environment from rebounding from such cataclysmic events.” Widely regarded as among the most devastating environmental catastrophes in U.S. history, the Deepwater blowout unleashed the equivalent of 3.2 million barrels into the Gulf in the three months after the platform exploded, killing 11 people. Combined, according to the National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration, the surface slicks alone constituted an area the size of Virginia. In addition to fish, the Gulf’s bird, sea turtle, and marine mammal populations were all hit hard.”

USC Dornsife: Can carbon capture solve climate change?
Margaret Crable, 4/25/24

“…There’s been much emphasis on reducing CO2 output by switching to greener energy sources, like solar and wind. Scientists and entrepreneurs have also been increasingly interested in capturing the CO2 in the atmosphere and storing it or putting it to use, a practice dubbed carbon capture or carbon removal,” USC Dornsife reports. “At a recent Dornsife Dialogues event, experts convened to discuss the promises and problems of this carbon capture technology… “Would carbon capture technology just enable continued fossil fuel use? Some critics argue that carbon removal may disincentivize ending reliance on fossil fuels. Joe Árvai, Dana and David Dornsife Chair, Wrigley Institute director and professor of psychology, biological sciencesand environmental studies, says that we need to focus on both reduction and removal for several reasons. For one, not all emissions can be entirely erased through green energy. “Some industries, like agriculture, are going to be really, really hard in the near term to fully decarbonize,” he says… “Carbon removal technology doesn’t make a particularly desirable product. There isn’t much of a market currently for carbon, although scientists think that could one day change. Thus, paying for the installation of a carbon removal plant can be a challenge. Árvai says that policy could help incentivize change. A government might require that companies that produce emissions must also remove them, or risk fines and a suspension of operations. This could create market incentives to drive down the coast of carbon removal and would also essentially act as a tax on emissions.”

TODAY IN GREENWASHING

The Sault Star: TC Energy, Brookfield Renewables, and Evolugen pitch in for the purchase of pickup to fight remote wildfires
Marguerite La Haye, 4/25/24

“Four sizeable corporate donations to the Prince Township Volunteer Fire Department have enabled it to purchase a used pickup truck with 4-wheel drive to respond to wildfires and other emergencies in remote areas of the township,” The Sault Star reports. “Fire Chief Hemsworth reported to council that the fire department initially applied for an in-kind donation of a used truck from TC Energy two years ago. TC Energy did not have an available truck; however, it donated $2,500 toward the purchase. Last year, the fire department reapplied to TC Energy, and received a second donation, this time for $10,000.” 

OPINION

Government Accountability Project: U.S. Military Planes “Crop Dusted the Workers” During BP Oil Spill Clean Up
John Scott Maas, 4/24/24

“My name is John Scott Maas. Those practices by the British Petroleum Corporation, which the U.S. government enabled, created nightmarish, unending health tragedies for some 48,000 clean-up workers, those living in surrounding Gulf communities and the environment. The primary cause was use of the deadly dispersant Corexit,” John Scott Maas writes for the Government Accountability Project. “…I am making this record to demonstrate why the use of Corexit must be banned to prevent that tragedy from happening again… “I was exclusively devoted, 12 hours per day, seven days per week, to the intense, daily activities necessitated by the emergency conditions in the Gulf. I was one of about 11,000 vessels in the Gulf who worked diligently to minimize the dangerous, toxic effects of the constantly gushing oil [uncontrolled for 87 days], as the site pumped billions of gallons of oil into the Gulf.  My work also included cleaning the badly fouled, environmentally protected marshes in and around the area… “Prior to my involvement in the cleanup activities following the BP oil spill, I can assert, unequivocally and unconditionally, that 1 was in very good health… “But it must be noted that I [like many other shoreline dwellers in the immediate proximity to the spill site] began to notice burning eyes, shortness of breath, and other odd symptoms contemporaneous with the first usage of the experimental chemicals in the hours following the event. Having been involved in other oil spills, I have never experienced the type of immediate, acute symptoms that began with my initial work, and continued throughout the approximate six-week period that required exposure to both the aerosolized particles and the water that saturated my shoes and clothing twelve hours per day, seven days per week… “Medical tests indicate I only have 35-45% lung capacity. I require oxygen every night to be able to sleep.”