EXTRACTED: Daily News Clips 7/17/23

PIPELINE NEWS

• E&E News: Mountain Valley pipeline turns to Supreme Court

• WV Metro News: Pipeline project is now at center of constitutional question: Can Congress halt judicial review?

• Iowa Capital Dispatch: Pipeline company and opponents spar over definition of ‘liquefied’

• KSFY: Eminent domain and CO2 pipelines: Legislative consensus questioned

• Insider NJ: Some Climate Activists Convicted, Others Released After Blocking Construction Site of Pipeline Expansion Project

• Globe and Mail: Enbridge lining up support for B.C. natural-gas pipeline plans

• Business in Vancouver: Enbridge cuts 140KM off Prince Rupert pipeline proposal

• Coldwater Daily Reporter: New natural gas pipeline approved between Marshall and Coldwater

• KIFI: Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement released for Crow Creek Pipeline Project

WASHINGTON UPDATES

• Press release: July 20th at FERC and PHMSA: No MVP, No Corroded Pipelines, Off Fossil Fuels Now!

• The Hill: Kerry testifies ‘under no circumstances’ will US pay climate reparations

• Washington Post: Deb Haaland, first Indigenous interior secretary, defends oil project that divides Alaska Natives

• Odessa American: EPA announces $1.3 million settlement for Permian Basin company

EXTRACTION

• Guardian: Big oil quietly walks back on climate pledges as global heat records tumble

• Common Dreams: Study Shows Methane Leaks Put Climate Risk From Gas ‘On Par With Coal’

• Globe and Mail: Oil sands can’t meet federal emissions targets without production cuts, analysis finds

CLIMATE FINANCE

• Canadian Press: Canada set to end domestic subsidies for unabated fossil-fuel production

OPINION

• Dakota Free Press: If You Can’t Beat ‘Em… Beseiged Landowners Should Propose Their Own CO2 Pipeline Through Schoenbeck, Noem, Lederman Properties

• The Hill Times: Trans Mountain pipeline will be Trudeau’s most ruinous legacy

• The Hill: Paying the price: Let market forces end the fossil fuel era

• The Hill Times: After 30 years of failed mitigation, we need to cut emissions by half globally by 2030; this is almost impossible, but must be done

• Green Biz: As carbon capture heats up, old questions reignite

• NOLA.com: Carbon capture projects can help state drive energy innovation

• New Yorker: Big Heat and Big Oil

PIPELINE NEWS

E&E News: Mountain Valley pipeline turns to Supreme Court
Niina H. Farah, 7/17/23

“The Supreme Court may soon step into a legal brawl over whether Congress violated the Constitution when it passed a law ensuring completion of the Mountain Valley pipeline — a fight that could have important implications for the power of the judiciary,” E&E News reports. “On Friday, the lead developer of the contentious Mountain Valley pipeline filed an emergency application asking the justices to undo orders from a lower court that froze construction of the project designed to bring natural gas 303 miles from West Virginia to southern Virginia. The key question before the justices is whether the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had the power to take action against the pipeline following the passage of a debt ceiling deal provision that stripped the judicial branch of jurisdiction over the project. Mountain Valley developers say the 4th Circuit was clearly in the wrong. “Instead of heeding Congress’s unambiguous command, the Fourth Circuit exceeded the scope of its jurisdiction by entering stays of the very agency orders that Congress deprived the Fourth Circuit of jurisdiction to review,” Mountain Valley Pipeline LLC wrote in its Supreme Court filing. Opponents of the pipeline argue instead that Congress acted outside its constitutional authority because the Mountain Valley debt deal provision effectively determined the outcome of cases still before the courts. Legal experts tell E&E the question of how Congress can direct courts’ jurisdiction over pending cases wades into murky legal precedent and raises concerns about the separation of powers between the branches of government. “The underlying legal issue in the case is about where the line is between the legislative power that Congress has, and the judicial powers that the courts have,” Evan Zoldan, a law professor at the University of Toledo, told E&E… “Congress can’t pass a law that tells a court it must make a specific finding in a pending case, Louis Virelli, a law professor at Stetson University, told E&E. “What they are doing there is taking away the courts’ ability to make a decision based on the law,” Virelli told E&E. However, it has been “pretty well settled” that Congress can pass laws that affect the outcome of cases that are already before a court — even if there has been a trial and the case is on appeal, Virelli told E&E… Dan Farber, faculty director the Center for Law, Energy & the Environment at the University of California, Berkeley, who called Mountain Valley’s claims “pretty compelling,” told E&E the Mountain Valley case may be an opportunity for the Supreme Court to clarify its stance in the years since Patchak was decided and conservatives have cemented a 6-3 majority. “I’d guess that the odds are in favor of the Supreme Court overturning the Fourth Circuit’s stay,” Farber told E&E. “But I don’t think this is a sure thing.”

WV Metro News: Pipeline project is now at center of constitutional question: Can Congress halt judicial review?
Brad McElhinny, 7/16/23

“Construction on the Mountain Valley Pipeline has been halted again because of a big constitutional question: Can the legislative branch forbid the judicial branch from reviewing whether the project is in line with federal environmental laws?,” WV Metro News reports. “Late last week, the pipeline’s developers asked Chief Justice John Roberts to intervene on the question. Lawyers for Mountain Valley Pipeline asked Roberts for an emergency reversal of an appeals court stay. Their argument was that Congress had been clear, that the pipeline could not be held up any longer by the courts… “The pipeline’s developer, Equitrans Midstream, is asking for a decision at the Supreme Court level even before that, though, saying any slowdown in the court system imperils the likelihood of finally completing the project before winter sets in… “Senator Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va. contended the appeals judges have disrupted the pipeline’s progress too often to be taken at face value. “The Fourth Circuit has shown more than a few times, particularly in this process, that they are working on an agenda here. You’re supposed to have a system that you have random judges out of the 15 judges,” Capito said. “Every time mountain valley pipeline comes before that court, they have the same three judges who are who issue the same decisions, which is stay. They’re obviously opposed to this, and they’re working on a political agenda.” “…Since then, The Wilderness Society has been fighting motions to dismiss the lawsuits by arguing that the congressional intervention violates constitutional separation of powers principles… “Four federal courts scholars have submitted a brief to the appeals court, concluding the action on Mountain Valley Pipeline violates a “core principle that Congress may not reach into a pending case and choose itself as the winner without amending substantive law.” “…They conclude that what Congress did is unconstitutional… “Several members of Congress from Virginia also filed an appeals court brief in opposition to sections of the debt limit bill that cleared the way for the pipeline. The Democrats — Bobby Scott, Gerry Connolly, Don Beyer, Jennifer Wexton and Jennifer McClellan — wrote that the congressional intervention “ran roughshod” over access to pending cases challenging the pipeline project.”

Iowa Capital Dispatch: Pipeline company and opponents spar over definition of ‘liquefied’
JARED STRONG, 7/14/23

“An Iowa company should not get permit for a hazardous liquid pipeline because the carbon dioxide it wants to transport isn’t a liquid, opponents of the project say,” the Iowa Capital Dispatch reports. “The carbon dioxide that would be transported by proposed pipelines from ethanol plants in Iowa would exist as a “supercritical fluid” — a phase that is somewhere between a gas and a liquid. Thus, it does not qualify for a hazardous liquid pipeline permit, opponents of the projects argue… “The dispute is part of a last-minute gambit by pipeline opponents to halt or delay a permit for Summit’s project, which is set for a final evidentiary hearing with the Iowa Utilities Board next month. The company’s permit process started nearly two years ago. There are pending motions to delay the hearing and to dismiss the company’s permit petition that were filed by Floyd County landowner George Cummins and the Sierra Club of Iowa. Several counties have joined the motions… “Cummins’ attorney, Brian Jorde, who is representing dozens of landowners in several states who oppose the proposed pipeline, made a similar argument about “supercritical” versus “liquid” in a Hardin County court case… “Still, Cummins argues that there is a clear distinction between supercritical carbon dioxide and the “liquefied carbon dioxide” noted in state law, and as such the IUB doesn’t have jurisdiction over Summit’s project. “If the Iowa Legislature intended ‘supercritical’ carbon dioxide be included … then it would have added the word ‘supercritical’ to the definition of ‘hazardous liquid,’ ” Cummins’ motion for dismissal says. “The legislature did not do so.” “…The IUB has yet to issue an order in response to the motions to delay Summit’s evidentiary hearing or to dismiss the petition entirely. The hearing is set to start Aug. 22 in Fort Dodge and has the potential to go for months. Pipeline opponents have said the schedule doesn’t allow landowners who are subject to eminent domain requests enough time to prepare.”

KSFY: Eminent domain and CO2 pipelines: Legislative consensus questioned
Beth Warden, 7/13/23

“South Dakotans have a love for their land, that runs especially deep for South Dakota farmers as it passes from generation to generation,” KSFY reports. “Pictures and Videos of CO2 pipeline surveyors on South Dakota private land are circulating among South Dakotans. “There’s a lot of people who are alarmed by what they’ve seen as far as the surveying crews. I’ve been alarmed by some of the actions that I’ve seen. But I also recognize that we have state laws,” Governor Noem said on Wednesday. Farmers documented new ruts on their land, left by the surveyors’ heavy equipment. “Well, you know, I’ve asked the company to talk to make sure that they are out there following the law as well,” Noem told KSFY… “Whether it is to protect eminent domain or protect private property owners, that’s something that the legislature has to have a role in right now. They’ve washed their hands of it,” Noem expressed… “I have no role in this pipeline issue right now,” Noem said… “Noem told KSFY she is reviewing another route outside of calling a special election, reviewing any legal standing that could provide assistance to landowners who don’t want a pipeline or surveyors on their land… “We asked what the situation was with Summit Carbon Solutions being a major sponsor at Noem’s inauguration event. Who received the finances? And how does that affect those in leadership making decisions about pipelines and landowners’ rights? Noem provided her response. “Never once gave me a campaign contribution and I don’t run the inauguration, the city of Pierre does. I have nothing to do with the inauguration. The city has her own committee and they run the inauguration and they’re the ones who secured the donation from Summit Carbon,” Noem told  We reached out to the City of Pierre Inauguration Committee with several questions. Summit Carbon Solutions donated $10,000.”

Insider NJ: Some Climate Activists Convicted, Others Released After Blocking Construction Site of Pipeline Expansion Project
7/15/23

“Criminal proceedings concluded on Thursday, July 13, against activists who peacefully blocked access to Tennessee Gas Pipeline Companies’s West Milford construction site where a contested new fracked gas compressor station is under construction despite nearly three years of resident-led opposition to the project,” Insider NJ reports. “Activists sat down in front of the gate and locked arms in an act of civil disobedience blocking vehicular access to call on Governor Murphy to stop construction of this new gas compressor, part of a larger project that involves the new station under construction in West Milford, and a massive expansion of an existing compressor station in Wantage, as well as another in Pennsylvania. Eight activists ranging in age from 20 to 80 were arrested. Three of the activists pled guilty to “Defiant Trespass,” a petty disorderly persons offense, and then received “conditional discharges” which will dismiss the charges if they comply with the terms of their probation for a year. Four other demonstrators had their charges dismissed “in the interest of justice.” The eighth demonstrator could not be in court due to a family emergency… “Who is this development even for? As New Yorkers, we reject the claim that any new dirty energy is ‘needed’ in our state, where gas from this pipeline is destined. There is literally no demand for more fracked gas in New York,” Teddy Ogborn, organizer with Reclaim Our Tomorrow, told Insider. “The only purpose of any new fossil fuel infrastructure is the same as it always has been: to line the pockets of billionaires who are selling our future for profit. Governor Murphy has got to stop taking such massive steps backwards while our planet burns.”

Globe and Mail: Enbridge lining up support for B.C. natural-gas pipeline plans
BRENT JANG, 7/17/23

“Enbridge Inc. is lining up support for its natural gas pipeline project in northern British Columbia as it works on ensuring compliance with environmental regulations, the company’s chief executive officer said at an industry conference where hopes for the future of Canadian exports ran high,” the Globe and Mail reports. “The project, known as the Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission route, would run from northeast B.C. to a location near the site of Ksi Lisims LNG, one of several liquefied natural-gas export terminals now in planning stages on the West Coast. “I think it’s just making sure that we’ve got all our ducks lined up, and that we’ve got all the appropriate consultations done, and that we can ensure success,” Enbridge CEO Greg Ebel said in an interview at last week’s international LNG2023 conference, which was held at the Vancouver Convention Centre. Canada currently has no operational LNG export terminals, and it has only one of them – LNG Canada, in Kitimat, B.C. – under construction. These terminals, and the pipelines that supply them, would enable Canadian LNG to be loaded onto ocean-bound tankers and shipped to an international energy market in search of reliable suppliers after a recent period of war- and pandemic-related disruption. But as Mr. Ebel and other leaders at the conference enthused over the industry’s potential, protesters gathered outside the venue to express opposition to increased fossil-fuel exports, which they say would run counter to Canada’s climate goals… “The opportunities for exporting LNG off the West Coast are just immense,” Lisa Baiton, president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, said in an interview during the conference… “But Frack Free BC, a group that includes climate activist organizations such as Dogwood, has said the focus should be on renewable energy, not on fossil fuels. “There’s no room for new LNG if the world meets its climate commitments,” Alexandra Woodsworth, Dogwood’s director of organizing, said in a statement. Supporters of Dogwood, the Wilderness Committee and Stand.earth were among those who staged a protest outside the LNG2023 conference.”

Business in Vancouver: Enbridge cuts 140KM off Prince Rupert pipeline proposal
Nelson Bennett, 7/14/23

“The BC Environmental Assessment Office has approved a plan by Enbridge to shave 138 kilometres off of its proposed Westcoast Connector natural gas pipeline, which may be resurrected as part of the Ksi Lisims LNG project,” Business in Vancouver reports. “The reason for eliminating the easternmost 138 kilometres? It runs through Blueberry River First Nation territory, and in 2021, the First Nation won a treaty infringement case based on cumulative impacts of industry on their treaty rights. Since that court decision, industry and government has had to tread much more lightly in Blueberry River First Nation territory. Evidently, Enbridge feels the section of pipeline running through Blueberry River First Nation is not essential to the Westcoast Connector project, which would run from near Chetwynd to Prince Rupert. “WCGT Ltd. found that removing the first 138 km of pipeline from the project as certified will reduce potential cumulative effects on Treaty 8 Territory, including those within BRFN Territory,” Enbridge says in its submission to the EAO asking for an amendment to its environmental certificate. The Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission project dates back a decade. The project was originally owned by Spectra Energy, and was to supply natural gas for an LNG project that was abandoned: the WCC LNG project. It was approved in 2014. Enbridge acquired the pipeline project in 2017 when it merged with Spectra. The clock has been running out on the project, as the environmental certificate states that there must be a substantial start by November 25, 2024. Earlier this year, Enbridge applied for an extension, but then withdrew it and filed its application for a certificate amendment instead. That means the November 25, 2024 deadline still stands.”

Coldwater Daily Reporter: New natural gas pipeline approved between Marshall and Coldwater
Don Reid, 7/14/23

“Michigan Gas Utilities Corp. will construct a replacement natural gas 12-inch pipeline along 20 miles in Branch and Calhoun counties from Marshall to Coldwater,” the Coldwater Daily Reporter reports. “Last week, the Michigan Public Service Commission approved a settlement agreement to replace an aging 10-inch MGU pipeline. The MPSC found “by replacing the existing 10-inch pipeline with the 12-inch pipeline, MGU has the ability to reliably meet its residential and commercial customers’ future growth needs in and around Branch, Calhoun, St. Joseph, Hillsdale, and Lenawee Counties.” The order found construction “will have no significant adverse impact on the environment” and “is consistent with the promotion of the public health, safety, and welfare.” “…The company looked at three proposed route alternatives. All presented annual maintenance difficulties and required intense construction through dense wetlands and waterways. All would disrupt the golf course south of Marshall.”

KIFI: Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement released for Crow Creek Pipeline Project
7/14/23

“The Caribou-Targhee National Forest released its Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) for the Crow Creek Pipeline Lower Valley Energy Project on Friday,” KIFI reports. “This announcement kicks off a formal 90-day comment period… “The proposed 12 inch or less high-pressure pipeline will provide a steady and reliable source of natural gas to the Afton/Star Valley, Wyoming area, ensuring a consistent source of energy to rural communities regardless of winter road conditions. The pipeline would be approximately 49 miles long with 18 miles crossing National Forest System (NFS) lands administered by the Caribou-Targhee National Forest. The Forest Service received a request from Lower Valley Energy in 2017 to construct a natural gas pipeline from Montpelier, Idaho to Afton, Wyoming… “The proposed plan consists of the Forest Service’s Preferred Alternative identified in the 2019 Final EIS, plus an approximate 0.5 mile reroute on private lands to avoid crossing BLM-administered lands,” Forest Supervisor Mel Bolling told KIFI.”

WASHINGTON UPDATES

Press release: July 20th at FERC and PHMSA: No MVP, No Corroded Pipelines, Off Fossil Fuels Now!
7/14/23

“Next Thursday, July 20, join Maury Johnson and Roberta Bondurant, years-long leaders in the fight against the Mountain Valley Pipeline, and other climate justice activists to demand that FERC and PHMSA immediately stop any further MVP construction work in West Virginia or Virginia. The 42 inch in diameter MVP pipe segments they want to put in the ground have been outside exposed to the sun, rain, wind, snow, flooding and standing water for many years, as long as six years. This is true even though experts, and even MVP top officials, have publicly stated that if they are left outside for more than a year, or even six months, the protective coating on them can corrode and they become more likely to leak or explode. Corrosion in a pipeline is extremely dangerous, leading to catastrophic explosions and death. Indeed, corrosion problems are the second greatest cause of pipeline failures. We are in a climate emergency. It’s time to end all new fossil fuel expansion. Take action with us in solidarity with Appalachian fighters defending their communities and land from arrogant and unscrupulous fossil fuel profiteers!”

The Hill: Kerry testifies ‘under no circumstances’ will US pay climate reparations
ZACK BUDRYK, 7/14/23

“White House climate envoy John Kerry said the U.S. would “under no circumstances” pay reparations to other countries ravaged by climate change in testimony Thursday before the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s oversight subcommittee,” The Hill reports. “During the hearing, subcommittee chairman Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.) directly asked Kerry whether the U.S. would pay reparations, to which Kerry responded in the negative. “I’m glad to hear you say that,” Mast replied… “Another Republican on the subcommittee, Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), accused Kerry and world leaders who signed onto the Paris Climate Agreement of “grifting.” “…At last year’s COP27 climate summit in Egypt, the U.S. joined other nations in committing to a “loss and damages” fund for developing countries affected by climate change. However, unlike a reparations program, that fund is not considered compensatory and does not involve specific countries conceding legal liability, a distinction that advocates for reparations have been quick to point out. The COP27 agreement does not specify who would pay into the loss-and-damages fund, and the U.S. and other Western powers heavily lobbied for excluding legal liability for historic emitters from the text.”

Washington Post: Deb Haaland, first Indigenous interior secretary, defends oil project that divides Alaska Natives
Maxine Joselow, 7/17/23

“As a member of Congress, Deb Haaland vehemently opposed the Willow oil drilling project on Alaska’s North Slope. But now as the head of the Interior Department, Haaland has become the public face of the Biden administration’s approval of the controversial project,” the Washington Post reports. “The about-face underscores the tensions Haaland must navigate as the first Native American to lead a Cabinet department. It comes as some Indigenous Alaskans say Willow will provide crucial jobs and revenue for the region, while others say the ConocoPhillips project will hasten a climate catastrophe. In an interview with thd Post, Haaland acknowledged that the Willow approval was a difficult decision, especially after she sent a letter to Interior opposing the project as the representative for New Mexico’s 1st Congressional District from 2019 to 2021. “I was very strong about that but when you come here, you can’t be like, ‘I’m the Department of Deb Haaland,’ right?” Haaland, who reportedly choked up in a March private meeting with environmental groups and Indigenous leaders trying to prevent the decision, told the Post. “There are a million considerations,” she told the Post. “I’m not running this department for the progressives who want to keep it [oil] in the ground. This is for the whole country. And so I am dedicated to doing the job that I was hired to do, and doing it in the right way. I mean, yes, I can insert my thoughts into things. But in the end, it has to be a decision that will benefit the country and certainly the region.” It is also true, Haaland told the Post, that “many Native Alaskans support Willow” because of its potential revenue and jobs. It would be wrong, she said, to think of Native people as a monolith. “No tribe is the same,” Haaland told the Post. “Even within pueblos, Indian tribes, we’re all different.” “…But some Indigenous leaders in the nearest town to Willow, Nuiqsut, have sounded the alarm about the project’s impact on the climate and pristine Arctic landscape… “Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic, an Indigenous organization, has sued over the Biden administration’s approval of Willow alongside five environmental groups. Rosemary Ahtuangaruak, the mayor of Nuiqsut and an Iñupiat activist, has also directly appealed to Haaland to halt the project.”

Odessa American: EPA announces $1.3 million settlement for Permian Basin company
7/13/23

“The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a Consent Agreement and Final Order (CAFO) to Callon Permian LLC for emissions from tanks, flares, and other equipment that EPA identified using a helicopter equipped with a special infrared camera that detects hydrocarbon leaks,” the Odessa American reports. “Callon LLC will perform corrective actions at thirteen of the company’s oil and gas facilities in the West Texas Permian Basin, resulting in an estimated reduction of over 1.2 million pounds of volatile organic compound (VOCs) emissions, according to a Thursday press release. VOCs contribute to the formation of ozone (smog), which can result in health problems such as asthma, lung infections, bronchitis and cancer. There also are climate change co-benefits achieved through this settlement in the form of an estimated reduction of over 4.6 million pounds of methane emissions. Methane is a potent climate pollutant that also impacts human health… “The company failed to comply with requirements for flares, tanks, and combustors as well as general requirements of the federally approved Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP), the release said.”

EXTRACTION

Guardian: Big oil quietly walks back on climate pledges as global heat records tumble
Dharna Noor, 7/16/23

“It was probably the Earth’s hottest week in history earlier this month, following the warmest June on record, and top scientists agree that the planet will get even hotter unless we phase out fossil fuels,” the Guardian reports. “Yet leading energy companies are intent on pushing the world in the opposite direction, expanding fossil fuel production and insisting that there is no alternative. It is evidence that they are motivated not by record warming, but by record profits, experts say. “The fossil fuel industry has massively profited from selling a dangerous product and now innocent people and governments across the globe are paying the price for their recklessness,” Naomi Oreskes, a history of science professor at Harvard University who studies the oil industry, told the Guardian. Oil majors have, over the past several years, rolled out pledges to decrease oil and gas production and slash their emissions, citing concerns about the climate crisis. But more recently, many have walked those plans back. Amid record-shattering warmth this February, BP scaled back an earlier goal of lowering its emissions by 35% by 2030, saying it will aim for a 20 to 30% cut instead. ExxonMobil quietly withdrew funding for a heavily publicized effort to use algae to create low-carbon fuel. And Shell announced that it would not increase its investments in renewable energy this year, despite earlier promises to dramatically slash its emissions. Climate-fueled extreme weather persisted through spring and summer. But fossil fuel companies have only doubled down on their oil- and gas-filled business models… “But Dan Cohn, global energy transition researcher at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, told the Guardian that the oil industry’s climate plans should not be taken at “face value”. “They have left no doubt that their pledges were deployed for cynical political purposes, only to be ditched when they no longer suited the industry’s strategic position,” he told the Guardian. That strategic position was to avoid being governed, Timmons Roberts, professor of environment and sociology at Brown University, told the Guardian. “The climate commitments … were almost certainly made to give the impression that they don’t need to be regulated because their voluntary pledges are adequate,” he told the Guardian. He told the Guardian climate pledges became popular while fossil fuels were becoming less profitable years ago, but since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, gas prices have risen – in fact, fossil fuel companies saw record profits last year.”

Common Dreams: Study Shows Methane Leaks Put Climate Risk From Gas ‘On Par With Coal’
KENNY STANCIL, 7/13/23

“The fossil fuel industry has long argued that fracked gas can serve as a “bridge” to a renewable-powered future, but a new study confirms that uncontrolled leaks make it as dangerous for the climate as coal,” Common Dreams reports. “So-called natural gas is derived from hydraulic fracturing (fracking) and composed mostly of methane—a planet-heating gas 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide over its first 20 years in the atmosphere. A methane leakage rate of as little as 0.2% is enough to render gas equivalent to coal in driving global warming, according to a peer-reviewed manuscript accepted last week in Environmental Research Letters… “Global gas systems that leak over 4.7% of their methane (when considering a 20-year timeframe) or 7.6% (when considering a 100-year timeframe) are on par with lifecycle coal emissions from methane-leaking coal mines… “The methane and SO2 co-emitted with CO2 alter the emissions parity between gas and coal. We estimate that a gas system leakage rate as low as 0.2% is on par with coal, assuming 1.5% sulfur coal that is scrubbed at a 90% efficiency with no coal mine methane when considering climate effects over a 20-year timeframe. Recent aerial measurement surveys of oil and gas production in the United States show methane leakage rates ranging from “0.65% to 66.2%, with similar leakage rates detected worldwide,” the abstract states. “These numerous super-emitting gas systems being detected globally underscore the need to accelerate methane emissions detection, accounting, and management practices.” Lead author Deborah Gordon, an environmental policy expert at Brown University and the Rocky Mountain Institute, told The New York Times on Thursday that if fossil gas leaks, even a little, “it’s as bad as coal.” “It can’t be considered a good bridge, or substitute,” Gordon emphasized. “What the world requires is to move away from all fossil fuels as soon as possible, to a 100% renewable energy future.”

Globe and Mail: Oil sands can’t meet federal emissions targets without production cuts, analysis finds
EMMA GRANEY, 7/17/23

“Canada’s oil sands will likely have to slash up to 1.3 million barrels a day of possible production to meet 2030 federal emissions-reduction targets, according to an analysis by commodity data firm S&P Global, resulting in the loss of somewhere between 5,400 and 9,500 jobs,” the Globe and Mail reports. “The numbers by the U.S.-based company, obtained by The Globe and Mail, underscore Alberta government fears that federal emissions-reduction goals are too much, too fast. Under Canada’s climate plan, the oil and gas sector is to reduce its emissions to 42 per cent below 2019 levels by 2030. The industry and Alberta have long argued that the target will threaten the province’s most important economic driver – and one of Canada’s, given the energy sector represented $175-billion (or 9.2 per cent) of Canada’s GDP in 2017. Proponents counter that a failure to significantly hasten emissions reductions in the oil and gas sector puts at risk Canada’s ability to meet its climate commitments and limit the effects of climate change. The S&P report analyzed only the oil sands, which produce the bulk of Canada’s crude and are the third-largest proven oil reserves in the world. It estimated that the production region can feasibly reduce emissions by around 15 megatonnes by 2030, based on regulatory readiness, technical feasibility and the time it will take to build large-scale emissions-reduction projects such as carbon capture and storage. That leaves a gap of 29 megatonnes to achieve the federal target – and plugging that gap would put at risk 800,000 to 1.3 million barrels of forecast production a day. However, the deployment of carbon capture technology could allow the oil sands sector to reduce the gap by 2035, and small modular nuclear reactors could further help to reach the 2030 target by 2040, the report found.”

CLIMATE FINANCE

Canadian Press: Canada set to end domestic subsidies for unabated fossil-fuel production
7/14/23

“The Liberal government is expected next week to finally fulfil a promise Canada made 14 years ago to end federal subsidies that aid in the production of fossil fuels,” the Canadian Press reports. “Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault says the policy directive will be similar to the one last year ending most of Canada’s public financing for international fossil-fuel projects. That means going forward, fossil-fuel projects could only receive federal funding if the government could square them with Canada’s climate commitments. Guilbeault says he won’t end subsidies for clean technology, such as carbon capture and storage systems, that help reduce or eliminate emissions from fossil-fuel production.”

OPINION

Dakota Free Press: If You Can’t Beat ‘Em… Beseiged Landowners Should Propose Their Own CO2 Pipeline Through Schoenbeck, Noem, Lederman Properties
CORY ALLEN HEIDELBERGER, 7/16/23

“If we can’t get the Legislature to change the game to protect landowners from the corporate carbon dioxide pipeliners who are stealing their property, perhaps the landowners can play the game to rally key Republicans to their side,” Cory Allen Heidelberger writes for the  Dakota Free Press. “…So, landowners, why not get incorporated and propose a carbon dioxide pipeline of your own?… “The landowners threatened by Summit Carbon Solutions’ use of eminent domain should thus apply for a siting permit from the Public Utilities Commission and submit a map for the SNL Freedom Pipeline—S for Senate President Pro Tempore Lee Schoenbeck, N for Governor Kristi Noem, and L for former SDGOP chair and current Summit lobbyist Dan Lederman, through whose property the Freedom Pipeline will run:… “Landowners, once you’ve filed your PUC permit and your map, drive over to Schoenbeck’s primary residence on Lake Kampeska, to Noem’s farm on Highway 81 south of Kone’s Korner, and Lederman’s villa in Dakota Dunes, and knock on their doors. Ask to walk around the property, take some measurements, and dig some holes. When Lee, Kristi (well, it’ll be Bryon, because Kristi is never home), and Dan say, “Hell no—get off my lawn!”, you say “No problem—see you next month,” hand them documents giving legal notice of your intent to come back and survey 30 days from now, and peacefully depart… “You might even have to come back several days in a row to make sure you find the absolutely safest, most stable route for the SNL pipeline through these properties. Be sure to call the press—you want to make sure you conduct your survey of the Schoenbeck, Noem, and Lederman properties as publicly as possible—but also bring your own cameras and phones to you can document and livestream everything to do and see on Schoenbeck’s, Noem’s, and Lederman’s properties. You may also want to notify the sheriffs so they can send deputies to ensure the safety of your survey teams and to enforce your legal right to enter other people’s property. Your surveying may, of course, do damage to the Schoenbeck, Noem, and Lederman properties, so make sure you call Tomi Lahren, the John Birch Society, and all the other prominent conservatives backing your cause and get them to chip in to a land security fund to pay for those incidental damages incurred during your perfectly legal presence on Schoenbeck’s, Noem’s, and Lederman’s property. Send a 100-farmer survey team tromping around the backyards of the Senate boss, the Governor, and their good pipeline pal, under full protection and authority of South Dakota Codified Law 21-35-31, and watch how fast they convene a Special Session to change that law.”

The Hill Times: Trans Mountain pipeline will be Trudeau’s most ruinous legacy
Susan Riley, 7/17/23

“The Trans Mountain pipeline expansion—desperately over-budget and destined for the remainder bin long before it makes a profit—is easily Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s most costly mistake economically and environmentally, if not politically,” Susan Riley writes for The Hill Times. “According to many industry, academic, and environmental experts, the pipeline will never recoup the $30.9-billion it is costing to build (so far) because costs have escalated so drastically over 10 years, and the future of oil is uncertain and potentially short-lived. In 2022, the federal Parliamentary Budget Office declared the project non-profitable. Yet the nearly-completed line, now destined to open early next year, is too big to fail, too costly to shut down, and too buried in debt to make serious money before increasing climate catastrophe makes the conversation moot. Meanwhile, taxpayers are on the hook for that debt, anything from $14-billion to $17-billion, by some estimates, although the numbers increase almost monthly. And it is truly a lose-lose proposition: for every year the pipeline does function, it triples the amount of Alberta oil—mostly crude—flowing to the West Coast and beyond, creating yet more of the deadly greenhouse gas emissions that are clobbering the planet and utterly discrediting Trudeau’s pious environmental claims… “So, not only is the government funding a project that will undermine its lofty climate goals—the “policy incoherence” flagged by federal Environment Commissioner Jerry DeMarco in 2021—it isn’t likely to see any lasting profit from its deal with the devil. If the government doesn’t find a private owner—its long-announced goal—the Trans Mountain pipeline could become a stranded asset, a white elephant, rather than a tool to make Canada’s economy “more sovereign and more resilient,” as the government’s increasingly surreal talking points claim. As for investing profits from the pipeline into green energy alternatives (talk about “incoherent”), don’t make us laugh. As for selling it, some Indigenous-led groups are still interested, but how much financial backing will they need from Ottawa to make a go of a fading asset? Will any private investor actually buy an indebted—perhaps outdated—mega-project?”

The Hill: Paying the price: Let market forces end the fossil fuel era
William S. Becker is executive director of the Presidential Climate Action Project, 7/15/23

“There’s an old saying about liars: Fool us once, shame on them; fool us twice; shame on us. We all should be ashamed of letting the fossil energy industry deceive us about global climate change. The price of that con has become unacceptably high,” William S. Becker writes for The Hill. “I’ve described the industry and its backers in Congress as a carbon cartel. But national energy policy also makes the American people unwitting partners in a Faustian bargain between the federal government and Big Oil. Even President Joe Biden, who has done more for clean energy than any of his predecessors, has been drawn into the cartel. He has embraced an “all of the above” energy strategy that allows coal, oil and natural gas to remain indefinitely in America’s energy mix. If the United States is to do its part in keeping global warming at or below 1.5 degrees Celsius, we should retire carbon-based fuels from the economy as soon as possible… “The United States should off-ramp all three fossil fuels from the economy well before 2050. National energy policy should clearly define when and how those retirements will proceed. Instead, President Biden waffles… “Biden can start by recognizing climate change for what it’s become: a threat to economic and national security. He can declare a climate emergency, giving him additional authority to deal with the crisis. Second, he can reinstate the moratorium on oil and gas production on public lands. Next, he and Congress can embrace the conservative principle that markets, not government, should pick the winners in the energy economy. The government can stop all public subsidies for fossil fuels. Given the oil industry’s maturity and enormous profits, it does not need and cannot justify taxpayer support… “Fourth, Congress can fully unleash market forces with a clean carbon-pricing bill so fossil fuel prices more accurately reflect their actual costs to society… “To put it plainly, current national energy policy is not only unsustainable; it’s also morally wrong. It makes the American people unwitting members of the carbon cartel and enablers of Big Oil’s greed.”

The Hill Times: After 30 years of failed mitigation, we need to cut emissions by half globally by 2030; this is almost impossible, but must be done
Bill Henderson is a climate activist based in Gibsons, B.C., 7/17/23

“About a decade ago, there was a flurry of news stories and columns in the Canadian media about carbon pricing,” Bill Henderson writes for The Hill Times. “…So I found the contact details for many of these pro-carbon pricing authors, added some journalists and activists to the list, and sent them all perspectives, citations, and links to the burgeoning literature that questioned carbon pricing as ineffectual and a distraction from real mitigation. Carbon pricing was a good idea that didn’t really work. I averaged about one email a week for three years before I stopped because I found that these authors weren’t interested in perspectives counter to their own… “The main lesson I learned from that experience was that most of these carbon-pricing advocates were climate-concerned people who were trying to protect economic and political business as usual from needed climate mitigation. They were economists from the oil patch and Bay Street who really didn’t want climate change to alter everything. They were professional activists conditioned to stay within our society’s rules, to achieve the possible and not necessarily what was needed. Or they were conservatives signalling that they favoured economically acceptable, market-based mitigation policies… “It is the same mindset: we can mitigate climate within our continuing, prosperous, very fortunate business-as-usual approach with only tweaks to our economy and lifestyles. Don’t worry, be happy. Don’t consider our responsibility to future generations. But now this limited mindset is wasting our last opportunity for effective mitigation… “But why, then, are so many energy experts, influencers, politicians, and corporations advocating an enhanced build-build-build-spend-trillions-on-renewables approach to climate mitigation? Because climate change is now being recognized as a severe existential danger, and it is so late in the game that the only treatment with any hope of keeping our world safe is deeply disruptive systemic change beginning with a rapid regulated wind-down of all fossil fuel production. This cannot be allowed. We can’t even consider such mitigation. Hence the deluge of positive disinformation selling the energy transition as solution. Net zero by 2050. Woo-hoo, now we’re cooking with gas!… “Wake up! Do we need a cap on the 20 per cent of emissions from the upstream fossil-fuel production that occurs in Canada while we happily export the 80 per cent of emissions per barrel to be burned somewhere else? Should we be spending billions of dollars to capture and sequester this 20 per cent of emissions so that we can continue exporting a product that is now a potential fatal toxin? This is now insanity. What mitigation do we owe our kids and how do we get there as soon as possible?”

Green Biz: As carbon capture heats up, old questions reignite
Jesse Klein, 7/17/23

“Businesses seeking to lead on sustainability and meet net-zero commitments should be working to decarbonize their Scope 3 emissions. These include fossil fuel, steel and fertilizer companies with hard-to-reduce emissions,” Jesse Klein writes for Green Biz. “Both these businesses and their big customers are hoping that a new technology suite — carbon capture, removal and storage — will save them… “However, watchdog groups argue that investing in these technologies will just prolong the reliance on industries with heavy environmental footprints instead of phasing them out… “Carbon capture may decarbonize hard-to-abate industries quickly, but it funnels even more money into oil and gas companies by contracting them to transport and inject the carbon into the ground, which can be an uncomfortable investment for the green economy. In addition, there are still questions about the viability of this developing technology… “Carbon capture and carbon removal each have their critics who argue the technologies are too expensive and don’t encourage sustainable development, but carbon capture has become a bit more of a lightning rod as it gives companies with the highest emissions a direct pathway to continue their entrenched business models… “Jim Walsh, policy director for Food and Water Watch, wants that money to be put toward other technologies that can create a green transition, not just continuing to funnel money toward fossil fuels and other heavy emitters. “It undermines resources that can otherwise be put towards a real transition to clean, renewable energy, that would actually get us off of fossil fuels,” he told Green Biz. “We’re not addressing the easy-to-abate emission.” “…According to Brian Snyder, associate professor of environmental science at LSU, pipelines are probably the biggest environmental, human health and safety and environmental justice concerns when it comes to scaling up carbon capture. Thousands of miles of new, high-pressure pipelines would need to be laid to transport CO2 from emissions sources to the geological storage wells… “It is sort of disquieting, I suppose, that the companies that caused the problem in the first place are going to profit again by solving the problem,” Snyder told Green Biz of the businesses benefiting from all the public and private investment that’s going to be pumped into this space.”

NOLA.com: Carbon capture projects can help state drive energy innovation
James Dill, Lafayette, 7/17/23

“I was born and raised in Louisiana, and I’m a small-business owner and avid fisherman. As a longtime resident of Lafayette, I’ve seen firsthand how the energy industry has grown throughout the state and across the region. Some groups are unfairly targeting the natural gas industry, by claiming their facilities are destroying communities, the environment and local fisheries,” James Dill writes for NOLA.com. “As someone who has been part of the fishing community in Louisiana my entire life (61 years), I can tell you the gas industry is our friend and has proven to be a supporter of the fishing industry. I recently testified in support of Louisiana’s primacy for carbon capture projects. My layman’s understanding of carbon capture is pulling carbon dioxide from fossil fuel emissions and injecting it into rock formations. Primacy would give the state power to permit and have oversight over carbon storage wells as opposed to the Environmental Protection Agency. Allowing carbon-capture projects to move forward will help create jobs and address our nation’s climate goals… “Supporting carbon-capture projects here in Louisiana is crucial to driving innovation and job creation in local communities. Natural gas companies should be applauded for investing in carbon capture to lower emissions and reduce their carbon footprint… “Louisiana has been at the forefront of innovation in the safe production of hydrocarbons and will continue to lead the country by example into the next era of energy production.”

New Yorker: Big Heat and Big Oil
Bill McKibben, 7/16/23

“In the list of ill-timed corporate announcements, historians may someday give pride of place to one made by Wael Sawan, the new C.E.O. of Shell, the largest energy company in Europe,” Bill McKibben writes for the New Yorker. “In 2021, Shell said that it would reduce oil and gas production by one to two per cent a year up to 2030—a modest gesture in the direction of an energy transition. But Sawan, who assumed command of the company in January, signalled a different direction. The rise in oil and natural-gas prices, following the invasion of Ukraine, had doubled Shell’s annual profits, to a record forty billion dollars. That windfall had an effect. While Shell remains committed to fighting climate change, Sawan told the BBC, cutting fossil-fuel production would actually be “dangerous and irresponsible,” because doing so could cause the “cost of living” to start to “shoot up.” “…But, in Texas, the Republican-led legislature spent much of the past year at work on laws that would discourage the use of renewables and prop up oil and gas. In Congress and on the campaign trail, the G.O.P. is expending far more energy in defending gas stoves than in doing anything about this growing crisis. So far, there’s no real political penalty for that kind of reckless behavior. Indeed, Sawan told the BBC that, while there are not currently any plans, Shell wouldn’t rule out moving its headquarters from the United Kingdom to the United States, where oil companies get higher market prices for their shares… “That is pretty much the definition of “business as usual,” and it’s precisely what has generated this completely unprecedented heat. If the disasters we’re seeing this month aren’t enough to shake us out of that torpor, then the chances of our persevering for another hundred and twenty-five thousand years seem remote.”