EXTRACTED: Daily News Clips 7/10/23

PIPELINE NEWS

• Des Moines Register: Does carbon-capture pipeline plan comply with Iowa law? Landowner, in challenge, says no.

• Iowa Capital Dispatch: Republicans ask each other for more accountability to stop carbon pipelines

• Michigan Advance: Tribal leaders, environmental advocates decry Enbridge appeal of Line 5 ruling

WASHINGTON UPDATES

• Politico: Interior To Propose Converting Offshore Oil Leases To CO2 Storage Leases 

• E&E News: Interior May Allow Use Of Offshore Oil Leases For CO2 Storage 

• E&E News: Juliana attorneys: Biden betrays climate goals

• E&E News: Court Lets ConocoPhillips Keep Willow Drilling Data Private 

• Canary Media: Natural gas is the pillar of the US electric grid. It’s also unreliable

STATE UPDATES

• Bloomberg: Drilling for Oil on the Moon

• Colorado Sun: Colorado warns Suncor it could face fines, other action after repeated benzene leaks into Sand Creek

EXTRACTION

• Bloomberg: Pemex Says Blast Impacted 700,000 Barrels of Oil Output

• RTO Insider: Moniz Calls for ‘Substantial Effort’ on Bioenergy with Carbon Capture

• The Narwhal: Oilsands giants pushed feds to delay and weaken emissions cap rules

• Policy Options: Cash-flow modeling shows carbon capture and storage can help meet climate goals

• Globe and Mail: Indigenous leaders strive for economic growth as they tout B.C. LNG

CLIMATE FINANCE

• Politico: Jim Jordan, Judiciary Republicans probe top asset managers on ESG efforts

• E&E News: House Republicans kick off anti-ESG campaign

TODAY IN GREENWASHING

• Guardian: Meet the DC thinktank giving big oil ‘the opportunity to say they’ve done something’

• Guardian: ‘Double agents’: fossil-fuel lobbyists work for US groups trying to fight climate crisis

OPINION

• Traverse County Record Eagle: Opinion: Shutdown imperative to protect Great Lakes

• Policy Options: Ottawa must think carefully about subsidies for oil and gas emission reductions
  

PIPELINE NEWS

Des Moines Register: Does carbon-capture pipeline plan comply with Iowa law? Landowner, in challenge, says no.
Donnelle Eller, 7/10/23

“A northeast Iowa landowner is challenging whether Summit Carbon Solutions’ proposed carbon-capture pipeline fits the state definition of a hazardous liquid pipeline, a distinction that could complicate the Ames company’s efforts to build the $4.5 billion project,” the Des Moines Register reports. “Brian Jorde, an Omaha, Nebraska, attorney representing Floyd County landowner George Cummins, told the Register the carbon dioxide the pipeline would transport isn’t a hazardous liquid, as defined in state law, which covers materials like crude oil, refined petroleum products and liquid fertilizers. Pipelines carrying “liquefied carbon dioxide” also fall under the Iowa Utilities Board’s jurisdiction. But Jorde argues in the motion to dismiss Summit’s petition for a permit to build the pipeline that the CO2 the company plans to capture from ethanol plants would be in a “supercritical” phase, somewhere between a gas and a liquid. “Carbon dioxide in the ‘supercritical’ phase is not a ‘liquid,’” Jorde said in the motion to dismiss. “Additionally, ‘supercritical’ carbon dioxide is not the same as or synonymous with ‘liquified carbon dioxide.’ “If the Iowa Legislature intended ‘supercritical’ carbon dioxide be included” in Iowa law, Jorde wrote, “it would have added the word.” The company has until next week to respond to the motion to dismiss and declined Friday to comment. Lawmakers are meeting in a special session beginning July 11 to consider limiting access to abortion, and could potentially be asked to clarify the board’s jurisdiction. But Jennifer Zwagerman, director of Drake University’s Agricultural Law Center, told the Register she doubted that lawmakers would be inclined to take up the issue, considering the divisions across the Republican-controlled Legislature over carbon-capture pipeline proposals… “Zwagerman and others told the Register it’s unclear when the three-person utilities board will act. Jorde told the Register he believes the board should provide an answer before a scheduled Aug. 22 hearing on Summit’s request to build the pipeline… “Jorde also filed a request that the Iowa Utilities Board reconsider starting the Summit hearing Aug. 22, two months before the date the board initially had considered. The board said it would first listen to concerns from landowners targeted for eminent domain, flipping the traditional order of having them testify last. Jorde told the Register the switch doesn’t give landowners sufficient time to prepare. He also said the utilities board staff lacks enough time — estimated at about 4,000 hours — to evaluate the roughly 1,000 parcels that could be subject to eminent domain. “The new hearing schedule violates the procedural due process rights of … landowners by requiring them to testify approximately four months earlier than previously scheduled and requiring them to testify about the proposed pipeline’s impact to their land before the party with the burden of proof — Summit — testifies,” Jorde wrote.”

Iowa Capital Dispatch: Republicans ask each other for more accountability to stop carbon pipelines
JAY WAAGMEESTER, 7/8/23

“Republicans, constituents and politicians called each other to action Saturday to fight against pipeline companies using eminent domain to acquire farmland, saying some GOP officials are not doing enough to stop the companies,” the Iowa Capital Dispatch reports. “The Midwestern Coalition to Protect Private Property Rights hosted an event in Fort Dodge to unite farmers, community members and politicians to fight against pipeline companies using government authority to obtain easements from unwilling Midwest farmers. Organizers said more than 300 people attended. The event featured Republican politicians from Iowa, South Dakota and North Dakota, three states that, along with Nebraska and Minnesota, are facing similar conflicts between the pipeline projects and property rights. Steve King, former U.S. representative for Iowa, said voters need to hold their elected officials accountable when it comes to pipelines and eminent domain.  “I would say to the people and constituents, go see your state representative, your state senator, call the governor’s office, maybe talk to our secretary of agriculture, our attorney general perhaps and weigh in on this,” King said… “Iowa state Rep. Steve Holt attended the event, but didn’t speak… “Scott Ritland, 63, a Republican from Story County who farms land that has been in his family 1862, said the bill’s failure to advance was evidence of special-interest influence. “The fix is in, the politicians have been bought off, they’ve been strategically purchased at their precise locations,” Ritland said… “South Dakota state Rep. Julie Auch told attendees to Saturday’s event how seriously she takes her oath to not take bribes, and voters should be proactive in voting out candidates who are supported by pipelines. “If they [your state legislators] are getting big campaign donations from Summit or Navigator, call them out,” Auch said. “America’s farmers are the best stewards of the land, not the government.” 

Michigan Advance: Tribal leaders, environmental advocates decry Enbridge appeal of Line 5 ruling
JON KING, 7/7/23

“In a June 16 ruling, a federal judge in Wisconsin ordered Enbridge to shut down its Line 5 pipeline that runs through Michigan within three years and pay more than $5 million in profits to the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa,” Michigan Advance reports. “…However, on June 30, Enbridge filed to overturn that ruling with the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit… “That action was met with strong criticism from environmentalists and tribal leaders. “Enbridge’s appeal — like their proposal to re-route the pipeline — is just a misguided attempt to keep the oil and their profits flowing at the expense of the Band and everyone else who relies on the Great Lakes,” Stefanie Tsosie, an Earthjustice attorney representing the Band, told the Advance. “Hundreds of wetlands and waterways in this unique ecosystem would be impacted by the reroute project, which only moves the threat of an oil spill further upstream from its current path. The only serious solution is to shut down and decommission Line 5.” “…Rene Ann Goodrich is a Bad River Tribal Elder and member of the Native Lives Matter Coalition. “Line 5 crosses over tribal treaty territory and one of those ceded territories is my own reservation of Bad River,” she told the Advance. “The danger that Line 5 brings to the environment is our biggest concern here.  We have that need, we have that responsibility, we have that duty to protect our life givers. Our life givers are the earth, the aquifers underneath the earth, the women that are sacred water carriers, and water itself that brings life. As sacred water carriers we stand with the water, and urge the Biden Administration to take action and shut down Line 5 immediately.” In May, leaders from the Indigenous Women’s Treaty Alliance submitted a letter to the President Joe Biden administration with an emergency request to decommission the Line 5 pipeline due to imminent threats of oil spills impacting the Bad River Watershed and the Great Lakes. 

WASHINGTON UPDATES

Politico: Interior To Propose Converting Offshore Oil Leases To CO2 Storage Leases 
Ben Lefebvre, 7/6/23

“The Interior Department is drafting language into a new rule that would allow companies holding offshore oil leases to convert them to allow the acreage to be used to store carbon dioxide instead, a department official confirmed Thursday, a move that could potentially speed the sequestration of millions of tons of greenhouse gas,” Politico reports. “Details: The new language would be included in a draft rule proposal on carbon capture and sequestration policy Interior plans to release later this year, according to an official who was granted anonymity to comment on internal policy discussions. ‘The Department’s forthcoming carbon capture and storage rule will provide guidelines’ for potentially converting oil leases to carbon sequestration leases, the official told Politico. ‘We are currently developing the draft of that rule, which we aim to release by the end of the year.”

E&E News: Interior May Allow Use Of Offshore Oil Leases For CO2 Storage 
Heather Richards, 7/7/23

“The Biden administration is considering allowing offshore drillers to convert their oil and gas leases to long-term storage of carbon dioxide in a potentially significant development for deployment of carbon capture technology,” E&E News reports. “This year, the Interior Department is crafting a draft program for carbon sequestration and storage off the nation’s coasts due to a 2021 congressional order. The program would permit companies to inject captured greenhouse gas pollution from industries like steel production into rock formations beneath the sea floor. According to an Interior Department official who was granted anonymity to speak freely Thursday on the forthcoming regulation, the draft rule will also provide guidelines for potentially converting oil leases to new carbon storage leases. The official said the draft is expected out by the end of the year. Interior’s proposal, which was first reported by POLITICO, comes at a time when the long-term outlook of the federal oil program is shifting due to climate concerns.”

E&E News: Juliana attorneys: Biden betrays climate goals
Lesley Clark, 7/10/23

“The youth behind a landmark climate change lawsuit are arguing that the Biden administration’s efforts to quash the case contradict the president’s pledges to tackle global warming,” E&E News reports. “In a filing with the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, attorneys for the 21 young challengers in Juliana v. United States urge the court to reject the administration’s motion to dismiss. The attorneys repeatedly cite President Joe Biden’s remarks and executive actions on climate change to argue that the push to derail the lawsuit “contravenes” Biden’s own work on the issue. “While Defendants argue in their Motion to Dismiss … that there is ‘no constitutional right’ at stake for these youth Plaintiffs,” the attorneys write, “President Biden has stated that climate change represents ‘the existential threat to humanity,’ a ‘clear and present danger to the United States,’ and ‘an emergency’ where long-awaited government responses are ‘going to save lives.'” The filing comes two weeks after the Department of Justice asked the court to reject an effort to revive the lawsuit.”

E&E News: Court Lets ConocoPhillips Keep Willow Drilling Data Private 
Heather Richards, 7/6/23

“A federal judge will allow ConocoPhillips to keep secret its drilling data for a massive oil project on public lands in the Arctic, bucking a state standard,” E&E News reports. “The court ruling, first reported by the Anchorage Daily News, grants ConocoPhillips additional time to make public the results of exploration wells drilled for the Willow project, the controversial drilling program in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A). In a final judgment signed June 26, District Judge Sharon Gleason of the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska said federal law keeping well data private until the end of a lease term supersedes an Alaska statute that would make Willow’s well data public after a 24-month period. ‘It would make no sense for Congress to prohibit the federal government from publicly disclosing Well Data for the duration of an NPR-A lease but permit a state to disclose such information,’ wrote Gleason, an Obama appointee, in a March preliminary ruling.”

E&E News: EPA Methane Reporting Proposal Sets Stage For Emission Fees
Jean Chemnick, Carlos Anchondo, 7/7/23

“EPA moved Thursday to close the gap between methane emissions reported by petroleum companies and levels of the potent greenhouse gas measured by researchers in oil producing basins and the outer continental shelf,” E&E News reports. “Congress mandated the overhaul of the 15-year-old Clean Air Act methane reporting program in last year’s climate law after numerous studies revealed that EPA emission tracking was lacking. The proposal also lays the groundwork for the Inflation Reduction Act’s levy on methane.”

Canary Media: Natural gas is the pillar of the US electric grid. It’s also unreliable
Jeff St. John, 7/5/23

“Willie Phillips, chair of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, knows the U.S. has a ​“reliability gap” between its electricity system and its fossil gas system, one that’s played a role in causing major wintertime grid outages in the past decade and threatens to wreak even more havoc in years to come. But he’s not sure how to solve it,” Canary Media reports. “…Gas is frequently touted by supporters for its flexibility and reliability — especially in comparison to wind and solar — but in moments of extreme heat and cold, studies find that these purported advantages evaporate. In fact, although some politicians, regulators and fossil-fuel industry groups have blamed renewable energy policies for grid crises, in-depth research by FERC and other entities shows this to be untrue. Climate-change-induced extreme weather is the key driver of summer and winter grid emergencies in the U.S., and fossil-fueled power plants are, if anything, more susceptible to failure under heat and cold extremes than are wind and solar power. And while extreme heat is primarily a risk factor for thermal power plants, extreme cold is a threat not just to power plants but to the gas delivery systems as well. That’s not to say that switching to 100 percent renewables would magically solve these reliability issues. Nor is it the case that a cleaner U.S. generation mix is without challenges of its own. But fossil gas is also not the no-brainer, ultra-reliable fuel it is often held up to be by those arguing for policies to build more gas plants and block renewable energy growth. (See the recent pro-gas, anti-renewables crusade from Republican state legislators in Texas.)”

STATE UPDATES

Bloomberg: Drilling for Oil on the Moon
Liam Denning, 7/9/22

“There’s an ocean of oil and gas frozen in place beneath the Arctic. The cascading impact of climate change would argue for leaving it there. Yet the melting of the High North’s icy barriers also feeds the ambitions of nations near and far to exploit it. Countless headlines herald a new scramble for the Arctic’s hydrocarbon riches,” Bloomberg reports. “It’s time for a reality check. As one oilman put it to me recently in Alaska, Arctic oil production “is the closest thing to drilling on the moon.” The moon, with politics thrown in, one might add. The decision to drill is usually, at heart, an economic one. But the Arctic’s riches also sit atop several grinding fault lines: between development and conservation; between the rivalries of great powers and the partisan scuffles of national politics; between the local and the planetary; between fear and greed. As much as expense and physical risk, these underlying frictions determine whether or when those frozen barrels see the light of day. Which brings us to the booms and busts of Alaska. The state has huge potential resources, but its heyday was a generation ago. A revival of sorts is happening now: The White House recently approved ConocoPhillips’ Willow project, a new oil field in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, angering environmentalists but pleasing state leaders and delegates on both sides of the red-blue divide. Oil production there should begin rising again after three decades of decline.”

Colorado Sun: Colorado warns Suncor it could face fines, other action after repeated benzene leaks into Sand Creek
Michael Booth, 7/7/23

“State regulators have warned Suncor of possible fines from “significant noncompliance” that poured benzene-tainted water into Sand Creek at up to 160% of permitted levels in repeated leaks this year, records show,” the Colorado Sun reports. “Due to the severity and/or persistence of these violations, the Water Quality Control Division is initiating a process to determine whether a formal enforcement action is warranted,” a mid-June letter from the division to Suncor said, with potential fines of more than $61,000 a day.  Colorado regulators also said discharge incidents of PFAS “forever chemicals” from Suncor into the creek continue to drive potential revisions to Suncor’s water discharge permits, which require renewal. “We remain focused on issuing a permit that holds Suncor accountable, requires Suncor to monitor and limit PFAS discharges and provide information when requested,” division spokesperson Kaitlyn Beekman told the Sun, in response to an environmental group noting repeated Suncor reports of PFAS discharges well above new EPA limits. Earthjustice, which has been monitoring Suncor’s reporting of water discharge analysis to the state, welcomed the potential cease-and-desist violations for benzene, calling Suncor’s problems a long pattern of polluting air and water in north Denver, Commerce City, and downstream of the Sand Creek and South Platte River confluence.” 

EXTRACTION

Bloomberg: Pemex Says Blast Impacted 700,000 Barrels of Oil Output
Amy Stillman, 7/8/23

“Petroleos Mexicanos said it lost production capacity for about 700,000 barrels of oil, more than a third of its daily output, after a massive platform explosion on Friday that left at least two people dead,” Bloomberg reports. “The company is working to recover production, Pemex Chief Executive Officer Octavio Romero confirmed in a video late Saturday, adding that output has already recovered to 600,000 barrels.   Bloomberg News reported earlier that some 450,000 barrels of oil and more than 560 million cubic feet of gas, roughly 11% of Pemex’s total natural gas output, were lost on Saturday only at the Ku Maloob Zaap production asset as the company shut production as a contingency measure, according to a person with knowledge of the situation. While the one-day loss is significant, it’s likely to be temporary as Pemex resumes some of its operations following the deadly blaze, the person told Bloomberg, asking not to be identified as the information isn’t public. A Pemex representative didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment on the loss or its current production capacity outside of normal office hours. Two people died and one remains missing after Pemex reported an explosion at the Nohoch Alfa platform gas processing center in the Cantarell field early Friday. Romero said late Friday that the platform’s connection module was destroyed, but that firefighting efforts helped stop the blaze from spreading to other modules. Pemex’s head of exploration and production Angel Cid said the explosion “substantially impacted” production at the platform.”

RTO Insider: Moniz Calls for ‘Substantial Effort’ on Bioenergy with Carbon Capture
K Kaufmann, 7/9/23

“Former Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz says BECCS is needed because “every damn tenth of a degree is really important,” but environmentalists say the technology is not carbon negative,” RTO Insider reports. 

The Narwhal: Oilsands giants pushed feds to delay and weaken emissions cap rules
Carl Meyer, 7/5/23

“The Pathways Alliance plastered Toronto streetcars and Vancouver billboards with optimistic messages about its plan to slash pollution and help Canada meet its climate goals. Behind the scenes, the coalition of fossil fuel producers struck a different tone,” The Narwhal reports. “A collection of internal government documents obtained by The Narwhal show how six major oil companies lobbied the federal government to weaken and delay plans to place a cap on heat-trapping pollution from the oil and gas sector. The Narwhal pieced together the extent of industry lobbying after reviewing six separate responses to access to information requests, totalling 69 pages. These documents show that, as early as December 2021, oil companies in the Pathways Alliance — Suncor, ExxonMobil affiliate Imperial Oil, Canadian Natural Resources, ConocoPhillips Canada, MEG Energy and Cenovus — were urging the government to consider “flexible and cost-effective” rules and give the industry a “long lead time” to prepare before they mitigate how they are contributing to the global climate crisis. The comments were part of the government’s early, informal consultations on the emissions cap that would signal the start of months of meetings between senior government officials and Pathways executives touching on the cap’s design. The documents — released by Natural Resources Canada — also show the lobbyists pressured the government to take a “non-regulatory approach” on slashing carbon pollution, one that could make it easier for industry and provincial governments to challenge or delay federal climate action through the courts. Despite telling Canadians its net-zero plan was “in motion” and it was “making clear strides,” the documents show the Alliance downplayed progress in private discussions with the government. The lobbyists said technologies needed to fight the climate crisis are “still on the lab bench,” or in other words still in development. And while these same companies have reported making record profits, they claim they don’t have enough money to implement climate-friendly solutions. “This is further evidence that the oil industry is aggressively lobbying for more government subsidies, loopholes and lower ambition,” assistant professor Amy Janzwood at McGill University’s Bieler School of the Environment, who studies fossil fuel production and sustainable energy and reviewed the Alliance’s comments at The Narwhal’s request, told the Narwhal.”

Policy Options: Cash-flow modeling shows carbon capture and storage can help meet climate goals
Scott MacDougall,  Jonathan Arnold,  Janetta McKenzie, 7/10/23

“Companies responsible for 95 per cent of oilsands production in Canada have committed to achieving net-zero upstream emissions by mid-century,” Policy Options reports. “…Looking across the options that oilsands producers have to reduce their emissions, carbon capture and storage (CCS) could have the biggest impact. Despite its potential, however, the economic case for CCS is still unclear… “Meanwhile, the largest oilsands operators are requesting an additional $11 billion from governments to help pay for CCS projects. To shed light on how existing regulations and proposed financial incentives affect the economics of oilsands CCS projects, we developed a cash-flow model (using publicly available information) to examine the viability of retrofitting two hypothetical oilsands facilities with CCS… “The upshot? Our modeling shows that these projects are economically viable after factoring in Canada’s suite of climate regulations and incentives, including the rising carbon price. In fact, our modeling shows private investment in oilsands CCS projects could yield substantial returns for the companies… “For starters, our results show why further public subsidies, beyond what have been announced, are not necessary to make these projects economic… “As federal and provincial governments continue to weigh the economics and tradeoffs at play, we offer three major takeaways from our results (our in-depth technical supplement is forthcoming on the Pembina Institute website). 1. Deploying CCS on oilsands facilities can improve the industry’s carbon competitiveness but does not eliminate transition risk; Scaling up CCS could significantly cut emissions and improve an oilsands facility’s carbon competitiveness… “2. Governments should follow through with announced policy measures swiftly, so installing CCS on existing oilsands facilities is economically viable before 2030; 3. No new public supports are required to get oilsands CCS off the ground. The results from our cash flow model show that government policies are critical to making oilsands CCS economically viable. Government funding in the form of a limited CCUS investment tax credit can help reduce the risk for these big, capital-intensive projects and kickstart decarbonization in the oilsands – as well as in other sectors such as cement.”

Globe and Mail: Indigenous leaders strive for economic growth as they tout B.C. LNG
BRENT JANG, 7/9/23

“Three Indigenous leaders will be promoting plans to export liquefied natural gas from British Columbia, striving for economic growth as they work to address climate concerns when building new energy projects,” the Globe and Mail reports. “Karen Ogen, chief executive officer of the First Nations LNG Alliance, will appear at a Monday morning event before an international LNG conference in Vancouver with two elected leaders from B.C.’s North Coast: Crystal Smith, chief councillor of the Haisla Nation, and Eva Clayton, president of the Nisga’a Lisims government. “For far too long, we were ignored in resource development, even on our own land,” the three women said in a statement on Sunday. “Fundamentally, reconciliation is impossible without a strong economic foundation to advance change.” Their message is that the Haisla and Nisga’a are in favour of exporting LNG, and also show their support for other projects such as Woodfibre LNG, which is backed by the Squamish Nation. Their gathering will take place ahead of opening ceremonies that will include land acknowledgements signifying the four-day LNG conference is being held on the traditional territories of the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh peoples. The David Suzuki Foundation and the Pembina Institute published separate studies in May that issued climate warnings about looming LNG exports from B.C. They say Canada’s focus should be on renewable energy, not on fossil fuels such as LNG. Activists worried about climate change say that besides upstream emissions from fracking for natural gas, the carbon footprint from export terminals also undermines the LNG industry’s assertions of major advantages over coal. But organizers of the LNG conference will feature panels in support of exports, such as a session titled Reconciliation and Canadian LNG: Indigenous Energy Leadership on the World Stage. That panel’s list of scheduled speakers includes the Haisla’s Ms. Smith and Woodfibre president Christine Kennedy.

CLIMATE FINANCE

Politico: Jim Jordan, Judiciary Republicans probe top asset managers on ESG efforts
JASPER GOODMAN, 7/7/23

“A trio of Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee sent letters to three top U.S. asset managers on Thursday saying their efforts to combat climate change with sustainable investing may violate U.S. antitrust laws,” Politico reports. “In the letters, Reps. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Dan Bishop (R-N.C.) asked the leaders of BlackRock Inc., Vanguard Group Inc. and State Street to turn over documents related to their sustainable investment commitments. The letters took aim at the firms’ participation in pledges to support investing aimed at achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050. The lawmakers accused the net-zero initiatives of being “collusive agreements” that may have “harmful effects on Americans’ freedom and economic well-being” by limiting investment in fossil fuels. The letters suggested that the firms’ participation in decarbonization initiatives may violate the Sherman Act, an anti-monopoly law that restricts anti-competitive agreements. The lawmakers also sent a similar letter to the leaders of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero and the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, groups that promote investment aimed at decarbonization.”

E&E News: House Republicans kick off anti-ESG campaign
Nico Portuondo, 7/10/23

“The House Financial Services Committee this week will launch a long-promised assault on environmental, social and governance investing with four separate hearings on the financial practice,” E&E News reports. “The hearings continue anti-ESG actions led by Chair Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) — who had pledged to make the issue one of the committee’s top priorities — as House Republicans continue to make the case that the practice is a form of far-left capitalism designed to drive dollars away from the fossil fuel sector. “I will work to push policies that benefit all Americans, not just those seeking to push their far-left agenda,” Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chair Bill Huizenga (R-Mich.) told E&E. “Across the nation, boardrooms are being held hostage by those who push policies that will lower returns for Americans trying to build a brighter and more financially secure future.”

TODAY IN GREENWASHING

Guardian: Meet the DC thinktank giving big oil ‘the opportunity to say they’ve done something’
Adam Lowenstein, 7/9/23

“The New York Times op-ed opened on a provocative note: “There is a real danger that the climate debate is deteriorating into a game of name-calling,” it began, “with oil and gas companies all too often portrayed as opponents of climate progress,” the Guardian reports. “The January 2020 article was written by the founder of the Climate Leadership Council (CLC), a Washington DC-based non-profit that advocates for scrapping certain fossil fuel regulations and replacing them with a carbon tax, with the proceeds from the tax returned to Americans as a rebate. Among the group’s “corporate founding members” are some of the world’s biggest oil and gas companies, including Shell, BP and, until 2021, Exxon – companies that have indeed spent decades, and billions of dollars, opposing climate progress… “The fossil fuel industry has a long history of hiring public relations firms to create front groups to obstruct climate legislation and sow confusion and doubt about climate change. But the CLC is not a front group. The organization’s “carbon dividends” proposal is real… “To its critics, however, the policy details of the CLC plan and those it supports are secondary to what the group itself offers its oil and gas industry members: a climate change “solution” that they can be for – one that, conveniently, stands little chance of becoming law. As fossil fuel companies continue lobbying against climate legislation, funding anti-climate politicians, bringing home sky-high profits from oil and gas sales, and doubling down on business models anchored on fossil fuel extraction and consumption, public participation in a “climate leadership council” appears to be an asset that corporations can deploy to perform the role of problem-solver while justifying their opposition to other laws and regulations. “There is a part of me that sees this as, ‘We can hold industry accountable a little bit without having to be in a place of discomfort, [without] holding them accountable in the way that climate change, environmental injustice, requires,” Dana Johnson, the senior director of strategy and federal policy at We Act for Environmental Justice, told the Guardian. “I think it gives people the opportunity to say that they’ve done something … It’s safe.”

Guardian: ‘Double agents’: fossil-fuel lobbyists work for US groups trying to fight climate crisis
Oliver Milman, 7/5/23

“More than 1,500 lobbyists in the US are working on behalf of fossil-fuel companies while at the same time representing hundreds of liberal-run cities, universities, technology companies and environmental groups that say they are tackling the climate crisis, the Guardian can reveal. Lobbyists for oil, gas and coal interests are also employed by a vast sweep of institutions, ranging from the city governments of Los Angeles, Chicago and Philadelphia; tech giants such as Apple and Google; more than 150 universities; some of the country’s leading environmental groups – and even ski resorts seeing their snow melted by global heating… “For instance, State Farm, the insurance company that announced in May it would halt new homeowner policies in California due to the “catastrophic” risk of wildfires worsened by the climate crisis, employs lobbyists that also advocate for fossil fuel interests to lawmakers in 18 states. Meanwhile, Baltimore, which is suing big oil firms for their role in causing climate-related damages, has shared a lobbyist with ExxonMobil, one of the named defendants in the case. Syracuse University, a pioneer in the fossil fuel divestment movement, has a lobbyist with 14 separate oil and gas clients. When you hire these insider lobbyists, you are basically working with double agents. “It’s incredible that this has gone under the radar for so long, as these lobbyists help the fossil fuel industry wield extraordinary power,” James Browning, a former Common Cause lobbyist who put together the database for a new venture called F Minus, told the Guarian. “Many of these cities and counties face severe costs from climate change and yet elected officials are selling their residents out. It’s extraordinary. “The worst thing about hiring these lobbyists is that it legitimizes the fossil fuel industry,” Browning added. “They can cloak their radical agenda in respectability when their lobbyists also have clients in the arts, or city government, or with conservation groups. It normalizes something that is very dangerous.”

OPINION

Traverse County Record Eagle: Opinion: Shutdown imperative to protect Great Lakes
Barbara Stamiris of Traverse City is a longtime environmental activist. She serves on the board of the Northern Michigan Environmental Action Council, is a member of the League of Women Voters and is active with Oil and Water Don’t Mix, 7/9/23

“Shutdown of Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline is urgent to protect the Great Lakes,” Barbara Stamiris writes for the Traverse County Record Eagle. “Recent erosion along the Bad River in Wisconsin brought Line 5 within 11 feet of exposure, threatening nearby Lake Superior, so emergency relief was sought… “Using Enbridge’s own estimate, Line 5 earns $1.76 million a day. So Enbridge will make more than $6.4 billion in the decade awaiting a tunnel, which is now slated for 2030. If Enbridge truly placed Great Lakes safety ahead of profit, it would shut off Line 5 before boring a tunnel directly below it… “Even Enbridge’s own goal is to be net-zero by 2050, which conflicts with 99 more years of oil. The shift to renewables makes any new fossil fuel infrastructure a poor investment… “It appears that the real purpose of the Enbridge tunnel proposal is to keep Line 5 operating as long as possible without having to actually build a tunnel… “Line 5 threatens the Great Lakes more every day. What will happen during the next bad rainstorm in Wisconsin? President Biden can revoke the Line 5 permit, but will he act before Line 5 fails? Call the White House at 202-456-1111 (Tuesday to Thursday from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m.) to ask that question. Please.”

Policy Options: Ottawa must think carefully about subsidies for oil and gas emission reductions
Rachel Samson, Jonathan Arnold, 7/10/23

“Federal commitments to phase out subsidies and other public financing for fossil fuels are on a collision course with its plans to cap oil and gas emissions, and to support sustainable jobs,” Rachel Samson and Jonathan Arnold write for Policy Options. “Despite progress in reducing some support for fossil fuel production, federal financing for emission reduction projects such as carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) is growing. The federal tax credit for CCUS is expected to cost between $1 billion and $2 billion per year by 2027. The oil and gas sector could also secure public funds through the $15-billion Canada Growth Fund or other programs. Disagreements around the precise definitions of “subsidy” and “inefficient” continue to paralyze the debate in Canada, particularly whether such support for emission reduction projects counts as a fossil fuel subsidy or does not. But the more important question is whether it makes sense for the federal government to allocate scarce financial resources to help oil and gas companies reduce emissions. As with most policy questions, the answer is: it depends… “Does it make sense to spend billions of taxpayer dollars to reduce emissions when Canadian production could be curtailed naturally by market forces?.. “If these projects can get built, there is little risk of facility closure from emission reduction costs, especially considering the anticipated flexibility in the oil and gas emissions cap and relatively buoyant oil price projections to 2030. Low-emission production will be the cost of doing business in the coming decades, particularly as climate-focused trade measures, such as carbon border adjustments, expand… “The transition risk associated with oil and gas projects – due to uncertain future global demand – magnifies the risk that governments will make the wrong bet… “As the federal government develops its framework for fossil fuel subsidies and finance, it should aim to phase out and avoid any high-risk public spending… “The government’s approach to financial support for emission reduction projects in the oil and gas sector should place the burden of proof on the company and the specific project, with all supporting analysis made publicly available. Oil and gas companies should be expected to provide evidence that the project will generate long-term public benefits through continued economic activity, emission reductions and employment, and that existing policy tools are inadequate.“