EXTRACTED: Daily News Clips 7/17/24

PIPELINE NEWS

• Pipeline Fighters Hub: Landowners, Counties, Lawmakers & Advocacy Groups Appeal Iowa Utilities Commission’s Approval of Summit Carbon Pipeline Permit

• Iowa Capital Dispatch: Broad array of groups object to Summit pipeline permit

• Radio Iowa: Petitioners seek reversal of Iowa regulators’ approval of carbon pipeline

• Carroll Times Herald: “Worse than we feared”: Landowners and representatives attend Stop Summit CO2 Pipeline Rally

• Moody County Enterprise: Fight over carbon capture pipelines continues

• Law360: Enbridge Seeks 6th Circ. Rehearing In Venue Dispute

• Bucks County Beacon: US Appeals Court Rules Environmental Groups Can Continue Legal Challenge of Pipeline That Would Pass Through Bucks County

• Hood County News: County implements pipeline permit policy

• Hart Energy: West Texas Hold ’Em: Permian Plays Pipeline Poker

• Phys.org: Ground surface conditions found to impact speed and distance of leaking natural gas

WASHINGTON UPDATES

• E&E News: Court pans FERC’s lax climate review of gas export project

• Politico: FERC Back At Full Strength After Commissioner Chang Sworn In 

• E&E News: Climate activists to protest DNC over Biden concerns

• Politico: Burgum’s Consolation Prize: ’Energy Czar’ 

• E&E News: Wanted: Top manager for EPA’s environmental justice office

STATE UPDATES

• Power Engineering: Indiana’s consumer advocate wants to thwart Duke Energy’s carbon capture study

• Wisconsin Public Radio: Manitowoc utility working on renewable project as regulators say its emissions are rising

• DeSmog: As California Regulators Refuse to Enforce New Orphan Well Rules, Lawmakers and Environmental Groups Cry Foul

EXTRACTION

• Mongabay: A year after toxic tar sands spill, questions remain for affected First Nation

• OilPrice.com: Gulf Oil Producers Invest Heavily in Carbon Capture and Hydrogen

OPINION

• Pelican Post: Letter supports Carbon Capture and Storage

• Troy Media: Federal and provincial efforts insufficient for CCS success
  

PIPELINE NEWS

Pipeline Fighters Hub: Landowners, Counties, Lawmakers & Advocacy Groups Appeal Iowa Utilities Commission’s Approval of Summit Carbon Pipeline Permit
Mark Hefflinger, 7/16/24

“Landowners, counties, lawmakers and advocacy groups including the Sierra Club on Tuesday filed motions for reconsideration of the Iowa Utilities Commission’s (IUC) recent decision to approve of a permit and eminent domain authority to seize land for Summit Carbon’s proposed CO2 pipeline,” the Pipeline Fighters Hub reports. “Among the filings was a motion to reconsider by landowners — represented by attorney Brian Jorde, with Domina Law Group and Iowa Easement Team, who also represented the landowners during the IUC hearings. Counties filing a joint motion included Shelby County, Kossuth County, Floyd County, Emmet County, Dickinson County, Wright County, and Woodbury County, while Hardin County filed its own separate motion. Rep. Charley Thomson and the Republican Legislative Intervenors for Justice (RLIJ), a group that includes 20 elected members of the Iowa General Assembly, also filed a motion. The IUC’s recent decision granting a permit to Summit was conditional upon the company’s receipt of outstanding permits in North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota and Nebraska – none of which have yet granted Summit any permits. The motions for reconsideration of the IUC’s decision are just the first step in the appeal process. Landowners and others are also likely to next appeal the IUC’s permit decision in the Iowa courts.  “It is evident that the IUC failed to consider much of the testimony, evidence and public comments in their decision. We have a strong case and we won’t stop until Summit is stopped,” said Jess Mazour of the Sierra Club Iowa Chapter. “In spite of all the evidence the opponents submitted to the commission and the lack of evidence presented by Summit, the Board clearly rendered a decision that was not based on the evidence,” said Wally Taylor, attorney for Sierra Club Iowa Chapter. Emma Schmit, Pipeline Fighters Director at Bold Alliance stated, “The IUC’s decision was not only careless and ill-thought, but outright hostile towards those opposed to risky carbon pipelines. This appeal is the first step in obtaining a legitimate, unbiased ruling that ensures our voices are heard and our rights are protected. From Iowa to North Dakota, we will not allow one corporation’s unbound greed to trample over the land or our lives. Summit can bully and bribe, but we will not back down until their carbon capture pipeline is canceled.” Hardin County landowner, Kathy Stockdale, stated, “As a landowner, I don’t feel that the IUC actually listened to us at all. We were treated as second-class citizens. The IUC didn’t consider any evidence I presented about the risks on my land.  My property rights are more important to me than any money Summit could offer me.” View the full motions for reconsideration from landowners, counties and lawmakers.”

Iowa Capital Dispatch: Broad array of groups object to Summit pipeline permit
JARED STRONG, 7/16/24

“Legislators, counties, conservation groups and landowners have asked state regulators to reconsider their permit approval for an expansive carbon dioxide pipeline system in Iowa,” the Iowa Capital Dispatch reports. “A total of eight requests were filed with the Iowa Utilities Commission in the past week before a procedural deadline on Monday, and they are likely precursors to lawsuits in state court… “Opposition to the use of eminent domain — in which Summit will be able to force unwilling landowners to host its pipeline network — is a common thread of the objections… “The bottom line is that a private entity like Summit cannot be granted the power of eminent domain unless it is a common carrier,” the Sierra Club wrote in its Monday reconsideration request. “But the evidence showed that Summit is not a common carrier. It will be contracting individually with ethanol plants, not the public generally, and it will own the carbon dioxide, so it will be carrying its own product, not carrying a product for hire.” The IUC used a self-designed “balancing test” that considered a number of factors to determine whether the project benefits the public. That test overwhelmingly favored a permit for Summit, and those who oppose the project say its conclusions were flawed. The group of Republican lawmakers further said the IUC’s process precluded input from many people who might be affected by the project, including those who live close enough to the pipeline route to be threatened by a potential pipeline breach but far enough away to not be in the pipeline’s direct path… “The three-member IUC has 30 days to respond to the requests, after which the groups can take their objections to court.”

Radio Iowa: Petitioners seek reversal of Iowa regulators’ approval of carbon pipeline
O. Kay Henderson, 7/16/24

“Officials from seven Iowa counties are asking the Iowa Utilities Commission to reconsider its conditional approval of the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline project,” Radio Iowa reports. “Shelby County Board of Supervisors chairman Kevin Kenkel told Radio Iowa for starters, the commission’s decision did not address zoning issues. “The counties also maintain that Summit is not a ‘common carrier’ and is not proposing a public use or benefit to the public and should not be granted the right of eminent domain,” Kenkel told Radio Iowa… “Landowners who oppose the project and the Sierra Club of Iowa have also filed objections… “In addition to Shelby County, officials from Kossuth, Floyd, Emmet, Dickinson, Wright and Woodbury Counties signed the 16-page challenge filed with the Iowa Utilities Commission. It’s unrelated to the pending case in a federal appeals court over hardous pipeline zoning ordinances in Shelby and Story Counties. “Other counties started passing ordinances and wanted to get involved in intervention at Iowa Utilities Board — Commission now — hearings, so we formed a coalition of intervenors,” Kenkel told Radio Iowa. “We are all inpacted on phase one of Summit.” “…A final option for groups that oppose the pipeline project would be filing a lawsuit asking the courts to block construction.”

Carroll Times Herald: “Worse than we feared”: Landowners and representatives attend Stop Summit CO2 Pipeline Rally
Nicole Hasek, 7/15/24

“A rally opposing the installation of a 690-mile carbon pipeline in Iowa, with routes going through both Greene and Carroll counties, was held at the Carroll County Fairgrounds on Wednesday,” the Carroll Times Herald reports. “Former Congressman Steve King was a guest speaker at the rally, calling the pipeline “unconstitutional” and “dangerous.” “…Jess Mazour, conservation program coordinator, shared information from the nationwide environmentalist group The Sierra Club on the impact of both the Summit and Wolf proposed carbon pipelines. The Sierra Club’s main five concerns with the project are how damaging it will be to the land, how unsafe carbon pipelines can be, the environmental damage it will cause, Iowans paying for a private project and believing eminent domain should not be used for private gain. The safety of the pipeline is the organization’s main concern, and Mazour told the Herald it is a matter of when and where, not if, there is a rupture in the pipeline. She told the Herald this happened in 2020 in Mississippi, and 40 people were hospitalized and 300 were evacuated. Mazour told the Herald farmers and landowners will be reimbursed for three years of lost crops, but the damage will continue much longer than this. The overall objective of the project is another concern of The Sierra Club, as Mazour said this is a for-profit project… “Mazour told the Herald it has now been proven that ethanol is not a “good feedstock for sustainable aviation fuel.” She said they believe Summit would be able to apply for 45Q and 45Z federal tax credits for the pipeline, and that is the “real reason” they want the pipeline as Iowans would pay for it and the company would profit off of it. “This is the latest scheme to steal our tax dollars and it’s a simple three-step process,” Mazour told the Herald… “Mazour said the most important takeaway from her presentation is that landowners on the expansion routes do not have to sign easements, which will be presented by land agents. She said land surveyors may also try and contact them and survey their land, but landowners can avoid the mail notice by refusing to accept it from the mail carrier. With proper notice, the land surveyor can go onto private properties, and Mazour encourages landowners to record everything and ask questions if this is happening.” 

Moody County Enterprise: Fight over carbon capture pipelines continues
Carleen Wild, 7/16/24

“Despite the passage of Senate Bill 201, the so-called Landowners Rights Bill, during the recent legislative session, the debate over regulating thousands of miles of carbon capture pipelines across the state is far from over,” the Moody County Enterprise reports. “State officials validated a referendum this past week that will allow voters to have the final say in the Nov. 5 general election… “We don’t want SB 201 to go through,” local opposition advocate Clayton Rentschler told the Enterprise. “It’s an overreach of the government. I just hope people will see through all of the propaganda coming down the pike now that this will get put on the ballot. That will be more of a struggle than trying to get signatures for the petition.” Voters who want to reject the Act of the Legislature are asked to vote “No” this fall… “House Majority Leader Will Mortenson believes the pipeline will ultimately be built whether the regulations are in place or not… “Opponents argue the regulations will strip counties of their ability to pass stringent rules that can effectively ban such pipelines. “I honestly believe a majority of South Dakotans think this pipeline is foolishness. I’m one of them,” Eschenbaum, who is also Chair of the South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance, formed by landowners and local officials to oppose the project, told the Enterprise. “I think it’s just a bunch of hooey and a big taxpayer boondoggle.”

Law360: Enbridge Seeks 6th Circ. Rehearing In Venue Dispute
Joyce Hanson, 7/16/24

“Enbridge Energy LP has asked the full Sixth Circuit to rehear an appellate panel decision to send the company’s pipeline dispute with Michigan’s attorney general back to state court, arguing that the opinion creates a conflict within the circuit over when the removal clock starts running,” Law360 reports. 

Bucks County Beacon: US Appeals Court Rules Environmental Groups Can Continue Legal Challenge of Pipeline That Would Pass Through Bucks County
Erin Flynn Jay, 7/16/24

“Two Pennsylvania environmental organizations scored a big win last week when the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit supported their right to challenge permits issued to the Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (Transco) before the Pennsylvania Environmental Hearing Board (PA EHB),” the Bucks County Beacon reports. “Now the legal challenge brought by the Delaware Riverkeeper Network and Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future (PennFuture)  before the PA EHB can proceed. The decision affirms the jurisdiction of the Board to hear appeals of state permits issued as part of gas pipeline projects. The Project is an expansion of Transco’s existing natural gas transmission system and will consist of new pipelines, a new gas-fired turbine driven compressor station, addition of gas-fired turbine driven compressor units at existing compressor stations, modification and uprate of existing compressors, abandonment of existing gas-fired compressors, and more… “This ruling does not give the state primary legal authority. “It ensures that the Environmental Hearing Board is not stripped of its authority to review pipeline permitting of this kind and ensures that the people of Pennsylvania maintain their right to challenge permitting through the normal permit appeals process,” Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper, and leader of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, told the Beacon… “It ensures the people of Pennsylvania to make their case before the EHB versus being forced immediately into the federal system,” added Rossum. “It is always an effort to challenge a permit, but the state process can be more accessible and there is a greater opportunity to create a record of evidence upon which the claims of the people will be judged when they go through the regulatory review at the state level.”   

Hood County News: County implements pipeline permit policy
ASHLEY TERRY, 7/16/24

“According to Precinct 2 Commissioner Nannette Samuelson, this policy will protect taxpayers from the cost of repairing county roads should they be damaged by pipeline construction,” the Hood County News reports. “I get calls almost weekly from people complaining about this company or that company tearing up the county roads, so this policy will require a permit and a bond to ensure that the roads will be restored if they are damaged,” she told the News. The policy states that any person, company or corporation desiring to place utilities or pipelines in or across the rights-of-way of public roads in Hood County shall obtain a permit from Hood County Commissioners Court for the construction, operation and maintenance of said pipeline… “You could also go out and take pictures of the before so that what it looks like afterwards, you would know whether they had restored it to the same quality that it was before they were there,” Samuelson said. “That’s the complaints that I get is that they’re tearing up the roads… “As the policy outlines, the permittee shall immediately, at its own expense, repair or replace all public property and all private property, including, but not limited to, driveways, fences and mail boxes, located in, along or adjacent to public right-of-way, which may be damaged or destroyed by any action or inaction of the permittee.”

Hart Energy: West Texas Hold ’Em: Permian Plays Pipeline Poker
Sandy Segrist, 7/16/24

The consensus is that the Permian Basin needs another major gas pipeline soon. Midstream companies are trying to figure out when … and who will make the move,” Hart Energy reports. “Call it pipeline poker. Some of the biggest names in the midstream business are seated at the table—Energy Transfer, ONEOK, Targa Resources and private company Moss Lake. The rules are simple: Whichever company can ante up with a final investment decision (FID) first wins.”

Phys.org: Ground surface conditions found to impact speed and distance of leaking natural gas
Southern Methodist University, 7/17/24

“When natural gas leaks from a subsurface pipeline, a ground cover of water/snow saturation, asphalt paving or a combination of these can cause the gas to migrate away from the leak site up to three to four times farther than through dry soil, a new study has found,” Phys.org reports. “A Southern Methodist University (SMU)-led research team also found that these surface conditions can impact the speed of the leaked gas, as well, traveling 3.5 times faster than an equivalent leak under dry soil conditions. “This work is highly significant, as for the first time, it links the impact of changes in surface conditions to belowground gas transport times and distances,” said SMU’s Kathleen M. Smits, one of the co-authors of the study published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology Letters. It’s critical for first responders and gas and oil companies to factor in soil surface structures when evaluating the safety risk of a pipeline leak to nearby homes and businesses, Smits, SMU Lyle School of Engineering Chair of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Solomon Professor for Global Development, told Phys.org… “Here, the researchers were able to safely leak gas from a cracked pipeline, then observe how far the gas leaked vertically and horizontally over specific points of time after the leak… “The researchers found that rain, snow, and asphalt were shown to block gas from escaping the soil at the surface, resulting in gas migrating both downward and outward away from the leak location. Imagine the gas traveling through something like a slab of Swiss cheese, Jayarathne explained. The gaps or “holes” in the soil that can be filled by water, gas or other particles. “Because of that, gas keeps migrating through the soil to far distances and increases the potential risk,” explained Jayarathne… “Previous data shows that gas will vent out of the soil quickly after the gas is stopped,” Smits told Phys.org. “But this study shows gas venting is unique based on the surroundings, especially the surface.” First responders should be aware that the gas site will continue to evolve after the leak is stopped, Smits told Phys.org..

WASHINGTON UPDATES

E&E News: Court pans FERC’s lax climate review of gas export project
Carlos Anchondo, Niina H. Farah, 7/17/24

“A federal court is sending energy regulators back to the drawing board to reconsider the climate risks of a proposed liquefied natural gas export project in Louisiana,” E&E News reports. “In a ruling Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission “inadequately explained its failure to determine the environmental significance of the project’s greenhouse gas emissions,” and also failed to properly assess the effects of the project’s nitrogen dioxide emissions. But the court stopped short of tossing out FERC’s project authorization entirely. “We think it is ‘reasonably likely’ that, on remand, the Commission can redress the defects in its [greenhouse gas] emissions and cumulative effects analyses and still authorize the Project,” said Judge Brad Garcia, referring to the proposed Commonwealth LNG project.”

Politico: FERC Back At Full Strength After Commissioner Chang Sworn In 
CATHERINE MOREHOUSE, 7/15/24

“Judy Chang was sworn in as a FERC commissioner on Monday, officially bringing the agency to a full complement of five regulators,” Politico reports. “…With the addition of Chang, FERC now has three Democrats and two Republicans on the commission. Chang’s swearing in marks the first time FERC has had five commissioners since the departure of former Chair Richard Glick in 2022 and comes at a critical time for the agency tasked with ensuring the reliability of the power grid and assessing new fossil fuel infrastructure.”

E&E News: Climate activists to protest DNC over Biden concerns
Robin Bravender, 7/16/24

“The group Climate Defiance plans to protest outside the Democratic National Committee headquarters Friday following reports that the party could hasten President Joe Biden’s nomination,” E&E News reports. “Activists led by the group Climate Defiance plan to protest outside of the Democratic National Committee’s headquarters in Washington on Friday following reports that the party could rush to cement President Joe Biden’s presidential nomination. The group, which regularly confronts government officials and CEOs with demands for more climate action, announced plans for a “protest and blockade” of the DNC on Friday morning as reports emerged that Democrats plan to conduct a “virtual roll call” to finalize Biden’s nomination ahead of the party’s convention that kicks off on Aug. 19. Climate Defiance — which has joined the camp on the left that’s calling for Biden to drop out of the presidential race — wants to shut that effort down. “At this Friday’s meeting, members of the DNC Convention Rules Panel will decide when to hold the official roll call — in other words, when to select the Democratic nominee,” Climate Defiance founder Michael Greenberg told supporters Tuesday in an email.”

Politico: Burgum’s Consolation Prize: ’Energy Czar’ 
7/15/24

“Doug Burgum, the Republican governor of North Dakota, may have lost out on his bid to be Trump’s running mate, but his allies are hoping he gets the chance to take on a high-profile energy policy role in a potential second Trump administration,” Politico reports. “Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), who is close to Burgum and Trump, told Politico that he’s recommending Trump appoint Burgum as White House ‘energy czar’ who would oversee all energy and environmental related policies from agencies. “Doug has way too big of a brain to be wasted on one little agency,” Cramer told Politico. “He could combine Gina McCarthy with John Kerry and actually do something meaningful”’ he added, referring to Biden’s former national climate adviser and special climate envoy, respectively.”

E&E News: Wanted: Top manager for EPA’s environmental justice office
Kevin Bogardus, 7/16/24

“EPA wants to bolster the leadership team for its national office at the heart of President Joe Biden’s goal of helping marginalized neighborhoods struggling with pollution,” E&E News reports. “The agency last week opened up a top role at the Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights. The position, deputy assistant administrator for management, is advertised on USAJobs.gov and was shared Monday on an email listserv by EPA. Administrator Michael Regan created the outpost in 2022, merging together the agency’s environmental justice and civil rights functions. Flush with billions of dollars in grant funds and assigned hundreds of staff, the office has dealt with top officials transitioning out while bereft of a Senate-confirmed leader. The management position, coordinating with other top officials in the environmental justice and civil rights office, “shares fully … in all phases of work supervising and managing” the program, according to its job ad.”

STATE UPDATES

Power Engineering: Indiana’s consumer advocate wants to thwart Duke Energy’s carbon capture study
Sean Wolfe, 7/16/24

“Duke Energy Indiana has proposed a carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) study for its Edwardsport Generating Station, and it wants to “defer expenses” while raising rates for its customers. The Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor (OUCC), a consumer advocate, is not happy with this development,” Power Engineering reports. “The OUCC filed testimony last week to the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, arguing that the commission should reject Duke’s proposal due to the “speculative nature of the feasibility and affordability of a CCS system.” “…In his testimony, Brian Wright, a utility analyst in the electric division for Indiana’s OUCC, noted that Duke’s first CCS feasibility study concluded that CCS was not feasible at Edwardsport due to the “lack of geological formations onsite that could act as a good carbon storage medium.” “…While Duke Energy has claimed it cannot estimate whether any of its out-of-state subsidiaries could benefit from the study, the OUCC said at “at the very least” the study should improve Duke’s knowledge and experience in evaluating the technological and geographical feasibility of CCS at other sites. Therefore, OUCC argued, the benefits of Duke’s study will likely extend beyond Indiana’s borders, and portions of the cost should be allocated to Duke’s other jurisdictions.”

Wisconsin Public Radio: Manitowoc utility working on renewable project as regulators say its emissions are rising
JOE SCHULZ , 7/15/24

“A small northeast Wisconsin utility is the only regulated electric provider in the state that’s expected to increase its carbon emissions by the end of the decade, according to a new draft report by state regulators. But officials with the municipality-owned utility say they’re working on a major project to turn that around,” Wisconsin Public Radio reports. “In the draft report, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin projects Manitowoc Public Utilities’ carbon emissions will increase by 2030… “Manitowoc Public Utilities officials say the projections from the PSC don’t reflect a plan to convert two boilers at its power plant from burning primarily fossil fuels to burning renewable fuel pellets, made from industrial paper and plastic waste that would otherwise go to a landfill… “While the pellets may be considered a renewable energy resource, Clean Wisconsin spokesperson Amy Barrilleaux told WPR it’s not the same as clean energy. She told WPR fuel pellets are not finite, like coal, but they still need to be burned to generate electricity. “Anytime you burn something — whether it’s methane gas at a gas plant, coal or waste pellets  in this case — pollution is released,” she told WPR. “And that pollution harms the climate and it hurts people who breathe it in.”

DeSmog: As California Regulators Refuse to Enforce New Orphan Well Rules, Lawmakers and Environmental Groups Cry Foul
Joe Fassler, 7/16/24

“As two of California’s largest oil and gas companies join by corporate merger, state regulators are declining to apply tough new rules governing the transfer of defunct oil and gas wells, DeSmog has learned. But a growing chorus of California legislators say that nonenforcement stance violates a groundbreaking law they fought to pass just months ago — and they, along with dozens of environmental groups, are demanding that regulators change course.  “They’re just ignoring the statute,” Kassie Siegel, director of the Climate Law Institute at the Center for Biological Diversity, told DeSmog. “We need the governor to step in and tell the agency to follow the law,” she added, referring to CalGEM, the agency that oversees oil and gas regulations. On July 1, the California Resources Corporation (CRC) announced that it had completed its acquisition of competitor Aera Energy in an all-stock transaction, a merger that stands to make the combined company the state’s largest onshore oil producer. In a press release, CRC President and CEO Franscisco Leon called it a “transformational deal,” one that would “help the Golden State meet its ambitious climate goals.” But critics say the deal should never have been allowed to proceed this far under California rules — not without CRC issuing a massive financial assurance bond, one big enough to cover the cost of safely shutting down Aera’s thousands of idle and low-performing wells. They’re pointing to AB 1167, signed into law by California Gov. Gavin Newsom in October 2023, which was intended to prohibit any company from selling or transferring such wells without first issuing bonds large enough to fully fund their cleanup.” 

EXTRACTION

Mongabay: A year after toxic tar sands spill, questions remain for affected First Nation
Ruth Kamnitzer, 7/16/24

“Canada’s tar sands are the fourth-largest oil deposit in the world, but separating the bitumen creates large volumes of toxic wastewater, which is stored in tailings ponds that now cover 270 km² (104 mi²),” Mongabay reports. “Many experts warn that contaminants from mining and the tailings ponds are entering the environment In 2023, 5.3 million liters (1.4 million gallons) of industrial wastewater breached a tailings pond at a tar sands site in Alberta province, raising fears in an Indigenous downstream community. Then the town learned a second tailings pond had been leaking toxic wastewater for at least nine months. In March 2024, the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation sued the Alberta Energy Regulator over its poor handling of the spills along with alleged regulatory failures. The case is ongoing. The incident highlights continuing concerns about the impacts of the tar sands industry on human health and the environment. Experts say government and industry plans for tailing pond cleanup and landscape restoration are far behind schedule, with no viable options now on the table to deal with the fast-growing volume of stored toxic wastewater.”

OilPrice.com: Gulf Oil Producers Invest Heavily in Carbon Capture and Hydrogen
Oxford Business Group, 7/16/24

“Gulf countries, led by Saudi Arabia and the UAE, are investing heavily in carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) and hydrogen projects to reduce carbon emissions and capitalize on the growing demand for clean energy,” OilPrice.com reports. “The Middle East has the potential to become a global leader in CCUS and hydrogen production, thanks to its abundant natural resources, low-cost solar energy, and supportive government policies. While CCUS and hydrogen offer promising solutions for decarbonization, concerns remain about the scalability and long-term viability of these technologies… “Since many of these ventures are being undertaken by Gulf NOCs, they present a test case for the global uptake of CCUS technology… “In a boost to the uptake of CCUS, in September 2021 Saudi Arabia launched a platform for MENA nations to trade carbon offsets and credits. These ambitions aside, there is concern from international stakeholders about the overreliance on CCUS to meet its net-zero plans due to the need for major technological advancements in this area and because CCUS potentially provides cover for the continued production of oil rather than encouraging the shift to clean energy sources. Gulf NOCs are also investing in hydrogen, a cleaner fuel and energy source that can be generated from hydrocarbons or green energy resources and used locally or exported.”

OPINION

Pelican Post: Letter supports Carbon Capture and Storage
DK Willard, 7/17/24

“With the energy transition in full swing, it’s imperative that Louisiana lead the charge in adopting low-carbon solutions like carbon capture and storage (CCS),” DK Willard writes for the Pelican Post. “ It’s important to remember that CCS is part of our current energy industry’s natural evolution, with the technology working in tandem with our state’s existing energy capabilities, allowing us to meet our emissions reduction goals while maintaining our oil and gas production… “By deploying CCS at these facilities, Louisiana could harness plant emissions while raking in billions in private investment and tax credits that can be directly reinvested into our local economies, public schools, and small businesses. Now that our state has been granted Class VI primacy, it’s time for us to take control of our energy destiny and make CCS a reality in Louisiana. With other major energy producers like Texas lagging, it’s time for Louisiana to step up to be a leader in the energy transition and a CCS pioneer.”

Troy Media: Federal and provincial efforts insufficient for CCS success
Lennie Kaplan spent over two decades in the public service of Alberta, including as a senior manager in the Fiscal and Economic Policy Division of the Ministry of Treasury Board and Finance, 7/16/24

“Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is critical for the Canadian oil sands sector to meet its 2030 and 2050 emission reduction targets,” Lennie Kaplan writes for Troy Media. “…Over the past few years, both federal and provincial governments have introduced various investment tax credits (ITCs) and incentives to promote CCS. But are these measures enough to achieve the ambitious targets?… “Recognizing the urgent need to combat climate change, Canada has set ambitious targets to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. In response to these commitments, the federal government has introduced various policies and incentives to encourage the adoption of CCS technology, which is seen as a crucial tool for reducing the environmental impact of the oil sands sector… “Our analysis reveals that current and proposed climate policies, including ITCs, are not enough to drive the CCS adoption needed for the Canadian oil sands sector to meet its 2030 and 2050 targets. Therefore, additional federal and provincial policies are necessary to promote CCS adoption and achieve significant emission reductions. A key strategy should involve governments partnering with the industry to lower CCS technology costs. This could be achieved through enhanced ITCs and mechanisms like contracts for differences (CfDs). These partnerships can help drive innovation and reduce the financial burden on individual companies, making CCS more feasible and widespread. Lower technology costs lead to higher CCS adoption rates. Thus, it is crucial for governments to implement policies that reduce technology costs and further encourage CCS use, ensuring the achievement of the 2030 and 2050 emission targets for the Canadian oil sands sector.”