EXTRACTED: Daily News Clips 7/27/23

PIPELINE NEWS

• South Dakota Searchlight: Carbon pipeline permit hearing kicks off with clashes on multiple fronts

• Mitchell Republic: Economists grilled on their bullish economic analysis of Navigator pipeline’s impact

• KELO: Minnehaha County’s request on CO2 pipelines rejected

• KSFY: Navigator CO2 pipeline faces tough questions from PUC

• South Dakota Public Broadcasting: Navigator CO2 seeks to prove economic benefit of pipeline project

• WEEK: BioUrja, Wolf Carbon Solutions address public in CO2 pipeline townhall

• WMBD: Supporters and naysayers attend town hall about proposed CO2 Pipeline in Peoria

• The Gander: What’s the Deal with the Enbridge Line 5 Pipeline in Michigan? 

• Press release: Merkley, Wyden Urge FERC to Reject Fossil Gas Pipeline Expansion

• WCHS: Homeowners near Mountain Valley Pipeline wait to hear the project’s faith after years of litigation

• WPMT: Sunoco Pipeline LP agrees to pay $660,000 to resolve environmental violations during construction of Mariner II East pipeline

• Associated Press: Mexico’s Pemex Denies Spilled Oil on Gulf Coast Beaches Came from Pipeline Leak

WASHINGTON UPDATES

• S&P Global Platts: US DOE will not develop certified natural gas standard amid focus on international emissions framework

• Press release: BIDEN ADMINISTRATION HALTS INVOLVEMENT IN “CERTIFIED” METHANE GAS STANDARDS

• E&E News: Democrats aim to yank pro-oil language from climate law

• E&E News: Manchin uses spending bills to shape climate law

• E&E News: Manchin stirs up FERC nominee guessing game

• S&P Global Platts: IRA ‘turbocharged’ carbon capture tax credit, but challenges persist: experts

• Carbon Herald: U.S. Government To Invest $100 Million In Carbon Utilization Projects

• E&E News: Carbon credits could be labeled ‘high quality’ later this year

STATE UPDATES

• Houston Chronicle: In reforming energy permitting, states rights looms large

• Colorado Newsline: No oil-train risk analysis performed, Union Pacific safety chief tells Colorado lawmakers

EXTRACTION

• InsideClimate News: In an Ominous Sign for COP28, G20 Nations Once Again Failed to Reach a Deal to Phase Down Fossil Fuels

• Bloomberg: Imperial Oil Spill Hurts Flock of Geese Near Oil-Sands Site in Canada

• Reuters: EQT in deal with Energy Transfer Louisiana Lake Charles LNG export plant

• The Verge: Why sucking CO2 out of the atmosphere can’t undo all the effects of climate change

• Guardian: Shell’s ‘obscene’ $5bn profits prompt outrage amid climate crisis

• BBC: Is the decline of oil in sight?

• Reuters: Climate change lawsuits more than double in 5 years as impacts hit home

OPINION

• Chicago Sun Times: Pipe nightmare? Put safety in place before transporting carbon dioxide to Illinois

• The New Republic: Oil Companies Are Raking In Billions—but the Industry Is Still Complaining
  

PIPELINE NEWS

South Dakota Searchlight: Carbon pipeline permit hearing kicks off with clashes on multiple fronts
JOSHUA HAIAR, 7/25/23

“A multi-day permit hearing for a proposed carbon capture pipeline got off to a tense start Tuesday at the Casey Tibbs Rodeo Center as participants clashed over the rules of procedure and aspects of the project including land access, county-level regulations, safety and data quality,” South Dakota Searchlight reports. “Brian Jorde, the attorney for some affected landowners, expressed concerns about the fairness of the proceedings. “I hate to say it, but it seems like there is a foregone conclusion, at least in certain aspects of argument here,” Jorde told South Dakota Searchlight. He said he was referring to a perceived bias in favor of the project on the part of some Public Utilities Commission staff members. The staff is assisting the three elected commissioners, Kristie Fiegen, Gary Hanson and Chris Nelson, who will ultimately decide whether to grant the permit… “During Tuesday’s hearing, Jorde asked a Navigator CO2 executive if the company will use eminent domain. “We strive to not go down that path,” said Jeff Allen, founding member and chief financial officer of the company. “So, the answer is no?” Jorde replied. Allen did not directly answer. Navigator has thus far struck access agreements — called “easements” — with about 30% of the owners of land the pipeline would cross. Jorde argued the lack of agreements with 70% of impacted landowners is a reason for regulators to deny a permit.  Jorde asked Elizabeth Burns Thompson, Navigator’s vice president of government and public affairs, if any landowners will testify in favor of the project.  “My understanding is no, we don’t have a landowner as a witness,” Burns Thompson said… “Opponent landowners who are impacted by the project – including Kay Burkhart of Valley Springs – expressed concerns to South Dakota Searchlight about the process. She said regulatory staff appeared to have already decided they are for the project. “At the beginning, there was an inequality as far as what testimony would be accepted by Navigator versus that of the landowners, and the landowners were being shorted,” Burkhart told Serchlight. She and some other opponent landowners expressed appreciation for the three elected commissioners pushing back on some of the staff’s recommendations.” 

Mitchell Republic: Economists grilled on their bullish economic analysis of Navigator pipeline’s impact
Caleb Barber, 7/26/23

“Economists, whose studies informed Navigator CO2 Ventures’ pipeline project application, were grilled about whether the pipeline would benefit corn producers — and everybody — in South Dakota,” the Mitchell Republic reports. “…One of the core tenets of the PUC’s questioning of both analysts was to determine if any of the carbon credit tax credit dollars earned from the pipeline would end up back in South Dakota. Commissioner Chris Nelson asked Jonathon Muller, whose consulting company was contracted by Navigator to model the pipeline’s impact on South Dakota’s economy, whether he knew where the revenue of the pipeline, or specific amounts earned from tax credits by Navigator or its partnered ethanol companies across the country, would end up… “Attorney Brian Jorde framed landowners’ easements as compensation for the cost of infringing on their legal rights, not just the physical consequences of laying pipe on their land… “Jorde said Muller did not take into account, when determining the statewide economic impact of the project, the persisting externality a landowner would take on by having an easement on their land, nor did he take into account the “stifled or lost” opportunities for county governments whose land has an easement… “A number of concerns around the pipeline have centered around the exceedingly bullish assumptions by ethanol industry, which Jorde picked apart in McEntaffer’s report. Navigator’s project, Jorde said, with the help of the analysts, did not assess thoroughly enough the potential negative economic effects of the pipeline’s construction and operation. Jorde pressed McEntaffer why the report did not prioritize certain variables, such as cost of export of ethanol products, changes in revenue for ethanol plants, and the possibility that ethanol prices may someday decrease, that might impact the overall feasibility of the project and potentially negatively impact the association of ethanol companies that employed him… “Jorde objected to the relevance of McEntaffer’s testimony on the basis that the report he prepared was cumulative and speculative. Nowhere in McEntaffer’s report did he specifically assess the Navigator pipeline’s impact on the South Dakota economy, Jorde said, but instead was a general report on the economic impact to all ethanol plants in the SDEPA.”

KELO: Minnehaha County’s request on CO2 pipelines rejected
Bob Mercer, 7/25/23

“The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission has decided that Navigator’s attempt to preempt counties’ zoning restrictions on pipelines will be considered as part of the permit hearing that opened Tuesday morning on the company’s carbon-dioxide proposal, rather than afterward,” KELO reports. “The Minnehaha County Commission on Friday had asked the PUC to delay choosing whether to override county ordinances until after Navigator’s permit is decided. Navigator in response on Monday opposed the delay, while the PUC staff’s lead attorney sided with Minnehaha County. The Moody County and Minnehaha County commissions separately passed zoning restrictions on pipelines after two were proposed in eastern South Dakota as part of wider multi-state projects… “The PUC on Tuesday however didn’t give Minnehaha and Moody counties a firm date for when they can make their arguments during the Navigator hearing. Chair Kristie Fiegen said the state commission will decide that on Thursday. Navigator’s hearing is scheduled to run through Thursday, then resume Monday and continue through August 3. Chris Nelson, one of three state commissioners who will decide whether Navigator gets a permit, said the PUC will see how the hearing is progressing. He said it’s possible that the state commission will reopen the hearing for one day in August to consider Navigator’s preemption request.” “…State law requires that the commission issue a decision within one year of receiving an application for a CO2 pipeline. The commission received Navigator’s application on September 27, 2022.”

KSFY: Navigator CO2 pipeline faces tough questions from PUC
Beth Warden, 7/26/23

“Wednesday was the second day of testimony for the Navigator CO2 pipeline application in South Dakota,” KSFY reports.”Members of the Public Utilities Commission asked tough questions regarding safety and regulations. Some commissioners voiced concerns about approving the pipeline before new safety regulations are announced next year that could allow Navigator’s operations to be grandfathered in. The PUC also voiced concern over Navigator not releasing the diameters of the pipeline route or their computer-generated “rupture dispersion model.” “…According to Navigator, thirty percent of South Dakota landowners who are on the path of the pipeline have signed easements for the project. Of the seventy percent of landowners who have not signed, a portion have reported receiving eminent domain letters.”

South Dakota Public Broadcasting: Navigator CO2 seeks to prove economic benefit of pipeline project
Evan Walton, 7/26/23

“The Public Utilities Commission is hearing testimony on the application of Navigator CO2 Ventures to construct the Heartland Greenway carbon pipeline,” South Dakota Public Broadcasting reports. “On the second day of testimony, all parties had an opportunity to question the economic impact studies conducted.  Sioux Falls-based Dakota Institute published a study that suggested carbon pipelines could provide an economic boost to the state… “ The provided economic impact studies show profitability, but critics argued not all of that impact will benefit South Dakota. Brain Jorde is legal representation for landowners. He argued that the projected stats are hypothetical.”

WEEK: BioUrja, Wolf Carbon Solutions address public in CO2 pipeline townhall
Lizzie Seils, 7/26/23

“It was standing room only at the Carver Center on Peoria’s Southside. Representatives from Wolf Carbon Solutions and BioUrja were addressing questions from the community on a proposed pipeline with a path through Central Illinois,” WEEK reports. “Wednesday night’s conversation centered around two key points. First, if the pipeline was safe, and second, if the companies had the best interests of the community in mind. BioUrja has not officially signed an agreement with WCS, but their CFO Beau Egert spoke of the decades-long record of pipelines and generally defended their safety… “Two local environmental advocates remain skeptical. Tracy Fox of Central Illinois Healthy Community Alliance criticized the company for not being clear or accessible in listing the addresses impacted… “Landowners impacted by the pipeline’s path have received letters from the company. Later this month, a representative with Wolf Carbon Solutions — the pipeline’s owner and operator — said the company will send another letter informing landowners of a compensation scale for right-of-way negotiations. WCS, a company with roots in the Canadian pension fund, said they don’t need to have right-of-way negotiations complete with every land owner to start construction, but state regulations also prevent them from making any kind of deal for now… “Daurice Coaster, a Southside resident and president of the non-profit Nourish, also accused BioUrja of acting in bad faith after they offered her non-profit $5,000. “They said they wanted to invest in the community, that they cared about the south side of Peoria,” Coaster said. “How true does that ring to you?”

WMBD: Supporters and naysayers attend town hall about proposed CO2 Pipeline in Peoria
Breanna Rittman, 7/27/23

“Residents of Peoria had the chance to voice their opinions and concerns about a proposed CO2 pipeline at a town hall on Wednesday. The town hall was hosted by City Councilmember Denise Jackson,” WMBD reports. “…In addition to residents with concerns, there were members of several unions in support of the pipeline including LiUNA Local 165 and International Union of Operating Engineers Local 649… “Tracey McDaneld, Director of Government Relations and Land said the process in Illinois does not allow for right of way to negotiate or talk about compensation until a 14-Day letter is mailed. She said the letters are slated to go out to impacted landowners within the corridor at the end of the month… “Wolf Carbon Solutions has also filed with the Iowa Utilities Board which has a longer process than the ICC, the US Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA) and sent a preliminary notification to the US Army Corps of Engineers. Brierley said the process with the Corps of Engineers will take about two years. The lateral application with the ICC has not been completed because Wolf Carbon Solutions has not brought on BioUrja Group as a client. Beau Egert, Chief Financial Officer of BioUrja Group, said they hope to have a decision by the end of the year.”

The Gander: What’s the Deal with the Enbridge Line 5 Pipeline in Michigan? 
Kyle Kaminski, 7/26/23

“Each day, nearly 23 million gallons of oil rushes through a 70-year-old steel pipeline beneath the Straits of Mackinac that stretches about 645 miles across Michigan. Line 5, as the pipeline is called, is part of Enbridge’s 8,600-mile Lakehead System which transports light crude oil and natural gas liquids across the midwest and Canada,” The Gander reports. “And despite insistence from Enbridge executives that Line 5 has “operated without incident” since 1953, reports show the pipeline has spilled at least 1.1 million gallons of oil in the past 50 years. For decades, state and tribal leaders have been sounding alarm bells… “Now the case could soon be headed back to a Michigan courtroom—and state Attorney General Dana Nessel may finally find herself in a position to have the pipeline shut down for good… “Appeals from both sides are expected to play out over the coming months, which are likely to lead to continued legal delays in actually having the pipeline decommissioned in Wisconsin… “Environmental activists and tribal leaders have spoken out against the project in recent months—arguing that a leak in the tunnel could cause the tunnel to be filled with crude oil and natural gas liquids, potentially leading to a catastrophic explosion from a single spark. Should the commission approve the project, it will also face a review from the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy (EGLE) and the US Army Corps of Engineers, which would reportedly delay construction of the tunnel until at least 2026.  Beyond the ongoing litigation and regulatory approvals, proponents of shutting down the Line 5 pipeline have also urged President Joe Biden’s administration to take action to ensure the Great Lakes are protected. Officials at Oil and Water Don’t Mix have requested Biden revoke the presidential permit that allows Enbridge to operate Line 5 and order the Department of Justice to intervene on Michigan’s behalf in the ongoing lawsuits between Michigan and Enbridge. The group is also encouraging Michiganders to reach out to the White House directly.” 

Press release: Merkley, Wyden Urge FERC to Reject Fossil Gas Pipeline Expansion
7/26/23

“Today, Oregon’s U.S. Senators Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden sent a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) following up on previous requests to deny permits for TC Energy’s Gas Transmission Northwest (GTN) Xpress project. With FERC’s decision expected this week, the Senators warn that the expansion of this pipeline is not necessary or prudent and would only increase costs for Oregon consumers and undermine laws in both Oregon and Washington State. “There is no clear justification for, or benefit from, GTN Xpress. TC Energy has entered into a precedent agreement with Tourmaline, a Canadian fossil gas producer that is not seeking to serve ratepayers,” wrote the Senators. “[Further,] if Tourmaline’s uses for the fossil gas are too uncertain to assess their environmental impact, it strains credulity that they could serve as the justification for a pipeline expansion.” The Senators highlight the lack of justification and benefit from the GTN Xpress, and their letter points to the fact that FERC itself has said that it is unable to assess how or where Tourmaline’s gas would be used to show that TC Energy has failed to demonstrate the need for this pipeline project. “GTN Xpress is a significant fossil fuel expansion at a time when Oregon and Washington are moving away from fossil fuels. GTN Xpress is simply incompatible with the laws of the states of Oregon and Washington. At the same time, TC Energy has failed to show that there is adequate need for the GTN Xpress. We urge you to find that GTN Xpress is not in the public interest, and to deny the application,” the Senators’ letter concludes.

WCHS: Homeowners near Mountain Valley Pipeline wait to hear the project’s faith after years of litigation
Daniel Burbank, 7/26/23

“Governor Jim Justice joined the list of West Virginia’s delegation filing a SCOTUS brief for construction to restart on the Mountain Valley Pipeline,” WCHS reports. “…Neighbors split on the decision. Some said they want this project to be restarted. Others said they don’t want to lose their land. “I’m ready for it to be done with just because of all the drama,” a Lindside, West Virginia resident who asked to remain anonymous told WCHS. Homeowners describe their area as quiet, and everyone knows everyone. This resident asked to stay anonymous talking about the pipeline. “It just provided a good income for us. They didn’t have to go too far, it was local. Everybody was great, the work was there,” the Lindside, W.Va resident told WCHS… “This pipeline is not necessarily better the environment but it’s going to better our lives,” the Lindside, W.Va resident told WCHS.

WPMT: Sunoco Pipeline LP agrees to pay $660,000 to resolve environmental violations during construction of Mariner II East pipeline
Keith Schweigert, 7/26/23

“The Pennsylvania Department of Environment Protection announced that Sunoco Pipeline L.P. has agreed to pay $660,000 to resolve numerous violations of the Clean Streams Law and the Dam Safety and Encroachments Act that arose during its construction of the Mariner East II pipeline between 2018 and 2021,” WPMT reports. “…The settlements resolve Sunoco’s civil penalty liability for violations that Sunoco has not previously paid a civil penalty through a prior consent order and agreement, DEP said. “Under Governor Shapiro’s leadership, we will continue to hold companies accountable for their actions and protect Pennsylvanians’ constitutional right to clean air and water. This money will help the Department of Environmental Protection keep Pennsylvania’s water clean,” said Richard Negrin, Secretary of the Department of Environmental Protection… “The first agreement resolves civil penalty liability for numerous infractions at the Exton Library Site in West Whiteland Township, Chester County, DEP said. These violations included: unpermitted discharges of sediment into wetlands and into Valley Creek and Ship Road Run, accelerated erosion and sedimentation, failure to obtain permits prior to excavating, and placing concrete into wetlands and other Commonwealth waters on several occasions. Sunoco also failed to conduct sampling as required by the terms of its authorization and failed to take appropriate measures to prevent the release of a polluting substance, according to DEP.”

Associated Press: Mexico’s Pemex Denies Spilled Oil on Gulf Coast Beaches Came from Pipeline Leak
Alan Caldwell, 7/27/23

“The head of Mexico’s state-owned oil company, Petroleos Mexicanos (Pemex), Octavio Romero, has stated that the oil washing up on the Gulf coast beaches in Mexico could not have originated from a pipeline leak that caused a spill of 1,350 barrels. Instead, Romero suggests that the oil came from natural seepage from ocean-floor vents,” the Associated Press reports. “According to Romero, the leak in an aging underwater pipeline started at the beginning of July. However, due to a lack of the required size fitting, the leak continued for 18 days before being repaired. Despite this, Romero argues that the light crude spilled from the Ek-Balam field throughout July could not have formed the thick tarry lumps reported on the beaches of Tabasco and Tamaulipas. Romero acknowledges the existence of natural underwater seepage in the Gulf, estimating it to amount to approximately 380 barrels per day. However, it remains unclear why the amount of oil washing up on beaches increased after the spill. Romero also criticizes the local media for their alleged exaggeration and disproportionate coverage of the spill, stating that their reporting has been distorted.”

WASHINGTON UPDATES

S&P Global Platts: US DOE will not develop certified natural gas standard amid focus on international emissions framework
Corey Paul, Maya Weber, 7/21/23

“The US Department of Energy does not plan to develop a standard for natural gas certified as low in greenhouse gas emissions and is focused instead on working with other nations to form a common approach toward tracking emissions across the natural gas supply chain, an agency spokesperson told S&P Global Commodity Insights July 21. “DOE is not introducing or endorsing any natural gas certification measures or standards, but instead is working with natural gas importing and exporting countries to develop an agreed approach to MMRV [measurement, monitoring, reporting and verification] that provides consistency and accountability in the marketplace,” the DOE spokesperson said in an email responding to questions. Certified gas, also known as differentiated gas or responsibly sourced gas, is natural gas production that has undergone third-party certification of its performance against certain environmental, social, and governance metrics, with a heavy emphasis on having lower methane emissions. But the US has yet to coalesce around a single standard, and industry players in recent months have questioned whether the DOE would look to develop one. The comments from the DOE came just days after the United States issued a joint statement with Korea, Japan, Australia and the European Commission pledging to accelerate mitigation of methane from the LNG supply chain. The DOE spokesperson said the agency’s MMRV work “focuses on bringing minimum performance criteria, independent verification, and transparency to the multitude of related industry, NGO, and international government initiatives directed at quantifying emissions throughout the natural gas supply chain.” In March, DOE officials had met with US gas industry representatives and foreign officials on the sidelines of the CERAWeek by S&P Global conference in Houston to discuss a potential governing framework for certified gas… “The Natural Gas Supply Association, a US trade group representing producer marketers, said July 11 that it had not taken a position on a potential certified gas standard from DOE amid a lack of consensus among members. “Across the industry, some are looking at that and still trying to decide,” NGSA President Dena Wiggins told a small group of journalists in a interview at the LNG2023 conference in Vancouver, Canada. “Some are supportive. I think there are some companies that believe that self-certification is the way to go or that even if there is some entity that should be doing the certification that this is not DOE’s role to play.” “Everybody is working on it, but how to get there is still a conversation,” Wiggins said.

Press release: BIDEN ADMINISTRATION HALTS INVOLVEMENT IN “CERTIFIED” METHANE GAS STANDARDS
7/25/23

“The Department of Energy has declined to endorse a standard for “certified” or “responsibly sourced” methane gas following pressure from a large coalition of climate and environmental justice organizations. Last week Gas Leaks, Earthworks and Oil Change International launched the Certified Disasters campaign and sent a letter signed by 148 organizations demanding the agency halt its involvement in certification schemes, which are being used to market methane gas as “clean” and justify the construction of gas export facilities, pipelines, power plants and gas-dependent buildings. In a statement to media, the agency said it is “not introducing or endorsing any natural gas certification measures or standards, but instead is working with natural gas importing and exporting countries to develop an agreed approach” to measuring and reporting methane pollution from the oil and gas industry. “The Department of Energy’s announcement that they will not be issuing a standard for ‘certified’ methane gas is good news,” said Caleb Heeringa, Campaign Director of Gas Leaks. “There’s no such thing as ‘clean’ gas and the industry doesn’t deserve ‘extra credit’ for meeting their legal obligation to reduce their methane pollution, which is worsening the deadly heat waves currently gripping the country. It’s vital that national and global methane regulations serve to clean up the gas industry and halt its expansion, not provide it a free marketing campaign.” “Methane gas will never be clean. Therefore, national and global methane regulations must halt the fossil fuel industry’s gas expansion,” said Allie Rosenbluth, Oil Change International US Campaign Manager… “Recent reporting suggested that the Department of Energy was considering weighing in to set a standard, which would lend legitimacy to the concept of “certified” gas and allow the oil and gas industry to present their product to the public as “clean.” Industry giants like BP and local gas utilities across the country are already marketing their use of “certified” gas and often charging their customers a premium. The industry is using the concept to justify the continued expansion of fracking, gas pipelines, buildings with gas appliances and gas export facilities that pollute the air and water in communities of color on the Gulf Coast – the very same environmental justice communities that the Biden Administration publicly claims to be protecting. Climate scientists and energy experts like the International Energy Agency agree that avoiding the worst climate outcomes means halting the expansion of methane gas (regardless of how much methane is released during fracking and from pipelines), including no new extraction as of 2021 and no new gas appliances sold by 2025.”

E&E News: Democrats aim to yank pro-oil language from climate law
Heather Richards, 7/26/23

“Leading Democrats on the House Natural Resources Committee are proposing a pair of bills to unravel pro-oil provisions in last year’s climate law,” E&E News reports. “There is no reason that we should require more oil and gas drilling as a prerequisite for building renewables,” Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee ranking member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said in a statement. Her legislation, the “Nonrestrictive Offshore Wind (NOW) Act,” would reverse a stipulation in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 that requires an offshore oil lease sale in the year prior to issuing an offshore wind lease. It is co-sponsored by pro-offshore wind lawmaker Rep. Deborah Ross (D-N.C.). A second proposal, the “Comprehensive Legislation for Expanding and Advancing Nonrestrictive (CLEAN) Energy Act,” would target a similar onshore requirement, which tasks the Interior Department with holding an oil and gas lease sale within 120 days of issuing a solar or wind right of way. That bill is sponsored by Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.), the panel’s vice ranking member.”

E&E News: Manchin uses spending bills to shape climate law
Timothy Cama, 7/27/23

“Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chair Joe Manchin is getting some traction in legislation to influence how the Biden administration implements the climate and infrastructure laws,” E&E News reports. “Manchin has in recent weeks inserted a handful of provisions into appropriations bills to restrict or direct how federal agencies carry out the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The language aims to push the administration in a more fossil fuel-friendly direction, like nudging the Treasury Department to define “green” hydrogen. Manchin has also been urging the Energy and Transportation departments to include natural gas and other fuels in their billions of dollars in funding going mainly to electric vehicle fast chargers. Manchin, a centrist who often bucks his party, has complained that officials are ignoring the law’s strict sourcing requirements for the electric vehicle tax credit and that they’re not approving enough oil and natural gas drilling leases, among other issues.”

E&E News: Manchin stirs up FERC nominee guessing game
Kelsey Brugger, 7/27/23

“After months of intrigue, Energy and Natural Resources Chair Joe Manchin revealed Wednesday that the White House is considering several of his choices for the vacant seat at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,” E&E News reports. “We’ve sent some names,” the West Virginia Democrat told E&E after a hearing focused on permitting. “They’re looking at those now.” Manchin declined to identify names. When asked about the fate of Judy Chang — whom the White House has been known to be pursuing — the senator said he did not know where “that stands.” “I understand that they are considering other names,” he told E&E. The commission is currently one member short and is evenly split 2-2 between Democrats and Republicans.”

S&P Global Platts: IRA ‘turbocharged’ carbon capture tax credit, but challenges persist: experts
Markham Watson, 7/26/23

“The Inflation Reduction Act “turbocharged” the 45Q tax credit for carbon capture and sequestration, but regulatory and capital challenges remain, panelists said during Infocast’s CCS/Decarbonization conference July 25 in Houston,” S&P Global Platts reports. “In particular, the tax credit was raised to $60/metric ton for carbon dioxide used in enhanced oil recovery or other industrial operations and to $85/mt for permanently stored CO2, from $35/mt and $50/mt, respectively. During a panel discussion about the “opportunities and critical questions” regarding the IRA, panelist Jeremy DuMuth, managing director for federal tax services at the Deloitte accounting firm, said that before the IRA passed, just 12 of 26 US CCS projects he knew about “made economic sense,” but after the IRA, they all could be financed… “But when moderator Michael Rodgers, counsel in the White & Case law firm, asked whether the IRA opened “floodgates” of investment into CCS projects, panelist Matthew Kittell, chief sustainability officer for the Americas of the Societe Generale investment bank, said, “I think that the waters have built up, but it’s sort of like in a reservoir – still waiting to be released, because there’s still a lot of things that have to be figured out in the market.” For example, panelist Greg Matlock, leader of the EY accounting firm’s Americas energy transition and renewable energy practice, cited the IRA’s labor requirements, which will be hard to monitor and could allow the Internal Revenue Service to “take away 80% of your tax credit.” “…Michael Yurkerwich, managing director of the CohnReznick Capital financial service company, added that “a lot of these projects are larger than typically tax-financed vehicles, and in order to get the requisite capital, they needed to create new opportunities to monetize tax credits, and that’s why” the IRA’s creation of the direct pay and transferability of tax credits will expedite the effort.”

Carbon Herald: U.S. Government To Invest $100 Million In Carbon Utilization Projects
Dimana Doneva, 7/26/23

“The Biden-Harris Administration announced on July 24 it will invest $100 million in carbon utilization projects. The grants, made available through the Investing in America agenda will support states, local governments, and public utilities in purchasing products produced from CO2 emissions,” the Carbon Herald reports. “The funding aims to accelerate the adoption of advanced CO2 management technologies and build a market for environmentally sustainable fuels, chemicals, and building materials derived from emissions from industrial and power sites… “The Carbon Utilization Procurement Grants program aims to support states, local governments, public utilities, and agencies by covering 50% of the expenses associated with procuring and utilizing products derived from the conversion of captured carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide emissions. To qualify for these grants, the commercial or industrial products to be procured and used under the grants must show a substantial net decrease in greenhouse gas emissions compared to existing products. This assessment is conducted through a life cycle analysis (LCA), which is reviewed and approved by the Department of Energy’s National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL).” 

E&E News: Carbon credits could be labeled ‘high quality’ later this year
AVERY ELLFELDT, 7/27/23

“Voluntary carbon markets have a new rulebook. The booming markets have drawn scrutiny in recent years amid a soaring supply of credits that allow polluters to offset their emissions — and allegations that many of the projects undergirding them don’t deliver the emissions reductions they promise,” E&E News reports. “An industry-led body is working to fix that problem. The group, known as the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market, released a full slate of standards and principles Wednesday that are meant to tame the controversial markets that encourage corporate investment in climate action. The effort has been years in the making. The council, which was born out of an initiative spearheaded by former Bank of England Gov. Mark Carney, launched in 2021 to create rules that would identify “high quality” carbon credit programs and projects — and to label them as such. The idea was to increase confidence in the market, so demand for credits would explode and unlock a key source of money for climate action. “There’s been doubts in the voluntary carbon market. There’s questions about [why] credits have not always been of consistent quality. And that has damaged confidence in the market,” William McDonnell, ICVCM’s chief operating officer, told E&E. “Once the labels are there, that should then give buyers confidence, because they can easily identify through the [“Core Carbon Principle”]-approved label in the registry, which of the credits meet this high-quality threshold,” he added… “Despite the boom, experts say market demand has actually tapered off amid rising concerns over the credits and the extent to which they deliver emissions reductions, and whether companies that use them are engaged in greenwashing.”

STATE UPDATES

Houston Chronicle: In reforming energy permitting, states rights looms large
James Osborne, 7/26/23

“State regulators have for decades had the final say in whether a natural gas pipeline or a long distance power line gets built, creating a formidable blockade to infrastructure projects that often require construction across state lines and hundreds of miles of private land,” the Houston Chronicle reports. “Now, Democrats and Republicans in Congress are weighing a radical shift in how those projects are permitted, potentially giving the federal government greater authority to force through projects that, while often unpopular locally, help move energy more effectively between regions… “Overhanging the discussions are state utility commissions, regional grid operators and state politicians, who have the ability to hold up and block interstate projects that often move energy among regions without benefit to their individual state. Many are reluctant to cede that power to the federal government. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which oversees the construction of transmission lines and natural gas pipelines, is working with state authorities on streamlining the permitting of energy projects, but it remains a “sensitive” issue, Jason Stanek, former chairman of the Maryland Public Service Commission, told the Chronicle.  “This is an issue where states have traditionally had exclusive rights,” he told the Chronicle. “There is concern there will be a power grab.” “…Sen. John Barasso, R-Wyo., has proposed taking away states’ ability to block infrastructure projects under the Clean Water Act, a strategy utilized by New York state to block gas pipeline projects into New York… “There has long been opposition within the Democratic Party to opening up the permitting process for fossil fuel projects, out of concern it will extend the life of the oil and natural gas industry. But there is pressure building now from some environmentalists to take action to speed up power line construction, which is needed to move electricity to cities and suburbs from often remote wind and solar farms.”

Colorado Newsline: No oil-train risk analysis performed, Union Pacific safety chief tells Colorado lawmakers
CHASE WOODRUFF, 7/25/23

“The Union Pacific railroad’s top safety officer told Colorado lawmakers on Monday that the company hasn’t “specifically” analyzed the risks of increased traffic from a proposed Utah oil-train project,” Colorado Newsline reports. “Rod Doerr, Union Pacific’s chief safety officer, spoke at a hearing of the General Assembly’s Transportation Legislation Review Committee, where he and other railroad executives faced questions about a range of rail safety issues. Public concerns about railroad safety have grown more acute in the wake of this year’s East Palestine disaster and the Biden administration’s approval of the Uinta Basin Railway, an 88-mile rail extension in eastern Utah that could drastically increase the amount of hazardous materials transported on the Union Pacific line through western and central Colorado… “But in response to a question from state Sen. Lisa Cutter, a Jefferson County Democrat, Doerr said that he wasn’t aware of any specific assessment of the risks posed by the Uinta Basin Railway’s construction. The project was approved by the federal Surface Transportation Board in December 2021 and its backers say they aim to begin construction next year, though it has yet to secure billions of dollars in financing. “Relative to the Uinta crude, specifically, we have not run a hazard analysis, at least that I’m aware of,” Doerr said. “I think it is fair to ask our hazmat team, that doesn’t work for me, and I will reach out to see if we’ve done any modeling or study work, and try to get that back to you.” Monday’s hearing marked the first time the debate over the Uinta Basin Railway — which has drawn opposition from Colorado local governments and members of Congress — reached the halls of the state Capitol… “Becky English of the Colorado Sierra Club, which has joined other environmental groups and Eagle County in suing to overturn the STB’s approval of the Uinta Basin Railway, told lawmakers that they have a role to play. “Can you imagine the impacts to the Western Slope if catastrophe were to occur? How much risk is acceptable to us?” English said. “I am asking you today to begin a serious, bipartisan discussion about this proposal, and our state’s response.”

EXTRACTION

InsideClimate News: In an Ominous Sign for COP28, G20 Nations Once Again Failed to Reach a Deal to Phase Down Fossil Fuels
Kristoffer Tigue, 7/25/23

“A four-day summit held in India last week by some of the world’s wealthiest nations ended without a commitment to phase down fossil fuels or to increase the development of renewable energy, largely because of opposition from Saudi Arabia, China and Russia,” InsideClimate News reports. “The deadlocked deals, which come amid a summer of record-breaking global heat, are the latest indicators that the countries contributing the most to the climate crisis could fail to reach similar agreements at the COP28 global climate talks in November—an outcome that experts have said could jeopardize key Paris Agreement targets. “With temperature records being set daily around the world and the impacts of climate change spiraling out of control, the world needed to hear a clarion call to action,” Alden Meyer, senior associate at the climate-focused think tank E3G, told the Financial Times. “Instead, what we got was very weak tea.” “…But on Saturday, an economic summit held by the Group of 20, or G20 for short, wrapped up their conference without reaching a deal that would commit the coalition members to reducing their use of fossil fuels. The nations also couldn’t agree on a commitment to tripling their development of renewable energy by 2030. Several analyses, including by the International Energy Agency, have concluded that nations must spend more than three times as much on clean energy than they currently do to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and to have any chance of keeping the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 degree target alive. The G20 deals both failed largely because several major fossil fuel-producing nations joined Saudi Arabia to oppose them, according to reports from the Financial Times and Reuters. Among those opposing the moves were Russia, China, South Africa and Indonesia, the reports said.”

Bloomberg: Imperial Oil Spill Hurts Flock of Geese Near Oil-Sands Site in Canada
Robert Tuttle, 7/26/23

“Imperial Oil Ltd. spilled crude from its Mihihkan plant at the Cold Lake oil-sands site, contaminating a flock of geese in the latest environmental mishap at the company’s facilities,” Bloomberg reports. “An operational issue caused 900 liters (5.7 barrels) of crude to be released into a process-water lagoon on July 24, the Alberta Energy Regulator said on its website. Later, a flock of 12 geese became stained after landing in the lagoon. Wildlife deterrents such as cannons have been deployed around the site, containment booms have been added to prevent the oil from spreading and the site is under 24 hour surveillance. The birds were taken to a facility for cleaning and rehabilitation… “The incident is the latest mishap at Imperial’s oil-sands sites. Two toxic releases at Imperial’s Kearl mine, one last year and the other earlier this year, prompted the federal government step up environmental oversight in the oil sands. The company and the Alberta Energy Regulator were accused of failing to adequately inform the public and local indigenous communities of the spills.”

Reuters: EQT in deal with Energy Transfer Louisiana Lake Charles LNG export plant
7/26/23

“EQT, the biggest U.S. natural gas producer, entered into an liquefied natural gas (LNG) agreement with U.S. energy firm Energy Transfer’s proposed Lake Charles liquefied natural gas (LNG) export plant in Louisiana,” Reuters reports. “EQT said in its second-quarter earnings release late Tuesday that the gas liquefaction, or tolling, agreement was for 1 million tonnes per annum of LNG. Earlier this month Energy Transfer said it entered three non-binding agreements for a total of 3.6 MTPA of LNG from Lake Charles. Energy Transfer said one of those agreements was a tolling arrangement for 1 MTPA for a 15-year term with an unnamed U.S. customer. Those three agreements, however, came even though the U.S. Department of Energy refused to extend Lake Charles’ authorization to sell LNG to non-Free Trade Agreement (FTA) countries beyond December 2025. Energy Transfer has vowed to keep developing Lake Charles even though it usually takes about four years to produce first LNG after construction starts. The company has not yet made a final investment decision (FID) to start building the project.”

The Verge: Why sucking CO2 out of the atmosphere can’t undo all the effects of climate change
Justine Calma, 7/26/23

“Sucking planet-heating carbon dioxide of the atmosphere doesn’t reverse all the effects of climate change, new research tells us. Carbon dioxide removal, as it’s called, can sound like science fiction — but many companies are already counting on it to undo some of the damage caused by their pollution,” The Verge reports. “Companies might try to prevent their greenhouse gas emissions altogether, or they might try to clean it up after the fact. That’s why we’re seeing all kinds of brands, from Microsoft to the Houston Texans, saying that they’ll plant trees or invest in new technologies that are supposed to filter CO2 out of the air. But even if they’re successful in trapping CO2, does it reverse the consequences of creating that pollution in the first place? Not completely — at least not on a reasonable timeline, suggests a study published today in the journal Science Advances. It looks at the consequences carbon dioxide emissions have on an atmospheric circulation pattern called the Hadley cell that has a big impact on weather across much of the world. The study shows what might happen to the world if people keep polluting willy-nilly before finding a way to take those CO2 emissions out of the atmosphere. Surprise, surprise — things don’t just snap back to normal, the study finds. That shows how important it is to limit pollution now rather than waiting to clean it up later. “It’s easy to think that if we reduce the CO2 concentration, the atmosphere will recover to its original state,” Seo-Yeon Kim, lead author of the study and a postdoctoral researcher at Seoul National University, told The Verge. “Nature is not that simple.” “…To avoid the worst effects of climate change, any efforts to take CO2 out of the atmosphere are really only supplementary at best. A transition to clean energy is what can stop planet-heating pollution from building up in the first place. “Reducing emissions right now is the most important thing,” Kim told The Verge.

Guardian: Shell’s ‘obscene’ $5bn profits prompt outrage amid climate crisis
Jillian Ambrose, 7/27/23

“Shell has reported profits of just over $5bn (£3.9bn) for the second quarter of the year, prompting outrage among campaigners who called the figures obscene, and a protest at the company’s London headquarters,” the Guardian reports. “The company’s second-quarter profits were down sharply from $11.5bn in the same months last year. Climate activists have criticised the company’s plan to increase oil and gas production despite record-breaking temperatures across Europe triggered by the climate crisis… “Shell’s shareholders are still in line for multibillion-dollar payouts despite the weaker second-quarter profits. Shell’s chief executive, Wael Sawan, said the company would spend $3bn on buying back shares in the next three months and, subject to board approval, another $2.5bn after its third-quarter results. Greenpeace activists targeted the company’s London headquarters on Thursday morning, erecting a billboard featuring Shell’s logo and the slogan “Our profit, your loss”. Maja Darlington, a campaigner at Greenpeace UK, told the Guardian: “While millions attempt to rebuild their lives after months of extreme weather wreaked havoc from Rhodes to Rajasthan, Shell is upping oil and gas production, slashing investment in renewables and posting billions of dollars in profits.” “…George Dibb, the head of the Centre for Economic Justice at the thinktank IPPR, told the Guardian Shell had proven its commitment to putting profits and shareholders “over our planet”. “It continues to make huge amounts of money off the back of the war in Ukraine and high energy prices. Meanwhile, incredibly, Shell is now paying more out to its shareholders in dividends and buybacks than it makes in profit, clearly prioritising these transfers over investing a net zero future,” Dibb told the Guardian.

BBC: Is the decline of oil in sight?
Jocelyn Timperley, 7/26/23

“The idea of “peak oil” – a peak in the amount of oil we can physically extract, followed by an irreversible decline in production – has been around for decades. So far, though, it has never been reached on a global level,” the BBC reports. “Last month, however, the International Energy Agency (IEA) – a global energy organisation that provides governments with analyses and policy support – announced we may soon reach a different but related value: a peak in the global use of (or “demand for”) oil. “We think that peak will be before the end of the decade, but just after 2028, so 2029 or 2030, most likely,” Ciarán Healy, an IEA oil market analyst and co-author of the report, told BBC. “We have this picture of growth, but slowing growth [this decade], and oil staying very significant, but maybe the turning points are in sight.” “…So, what lies behind these numbers – and what is preventing a faster decline? BBC Future here digs into the huge global changes happening behind these predictions.”

Reuters: Climate change lawsuits more than double in 5 years as impacts hit home
Gloria Dickie, 7/26/23

“The number of court cases related to climate change has more than doubled in five years as impacts ranging from shrinking water resources to dangerous heatwaves hit home for millions, a report said on Thursday,” Reuters reports. “Some 2,180 climate-related lawsuits have been filed across 65 jurisdictions over the past five years, according to the report by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and New York’s Columbia University, which tracks ongoing climate cases in a global database. As of 2017, there were just 884 cases documented in 24 jurisdictions, the report said. “We’re seeing a huge increase in the number of cases,” said Maria Antonia Tigre, a senior fellow in global climate litigation at Columbia’s Sabin Center, who told Reuters the number of cases filed per year has doubled in the past five years. While the United States still dominates with more than 1,500 cases, other countries are seeing increases. About 17 percent of cases have been filed in developing countries, according to the report, with rainforest-rich Brazil and Indonesia among the countries seeing the most.” “…Youth climate activists have already played a central role, with 34 cases brought forward on behalf of children, teens, and young adults. Litigation targeting the disruptive actions of climate activists is also on the rise, Tigre told Reuters.”

OPINION

Chicago Sun Times: Pipe nightmare? Put safety in place before transporting carbon dioxide to Illinois
Editorial Board, 7/27/23 

“Before turning on the spigot to pipe carbon dioxide to Illinois, safety concerns must be thoroughly addressed,” the Chicago Sun Times Editorial Board writes. “…But as this editorial board wrote in May, Illinois should put strong safeguards in place to protect residents, landowners, taxpayers, drinking water and the climate before allowing the pipelines to proceed… “Navigator has reportedly been able to secure only 13% of the right of way it needs for the pipeline, and opponents fear the pipeline company would turn to eminent domain to secure control of the rest. Sen. Steve McClure (R-Springfield) is calling for a moratorium until the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration updates federal safety standards for transporting carbon dioxide. Right now, there are no federal standards on how close carbon dioxide pipelines can be placed to a home, school or hospital, or whether a substance people can smell must be added to the gas to alert them of danger. Carbon dioxide is an asphyxiant that can harm or kill people, livestock and wildlife. In 2020, 46 people were hospitalized when a pipeline carrying carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide ruptured near a small Mississippi village. Sequestering and transporting carbon dioxide could be a tool to help fight climate change, but only if it is done safely and doesn’t encourage the burning of fossil fuels.”

The New Republic: Oil Companies Are Raking In Billions—but the Industry Is Still Complaining
Kate Aronoff, 7/26/23

“July is expected to be Earth’s hottest month ever, amid temperatures that scientists found would be “nearly impossible” without climate change,” Kate Aronoff writes for The New Republic. “…The bad news doesn’t stop there, though: In the second fiscal quarter of 2023, Chevron announced that it only made $6 billion. Chevron’s earnings, previewed earlier this week, beat expectations on Wall Street but still fell nearly 50 percent below those made in the same quarter last year. That’s thanks mostly to lower prices in crude oil and natural gas over the last few months. But as more companies prepare to announce Q2 earnings through the end of the month, executives and their lobbyists will—as ever—point to any evidence they can to blame the White House for villainizing energy companies, raising prices and threatening energy security. That whining tends to follow some familiar patterns. This week, the American Petroleum Institute railed against the Interior Department’s newly announced plan to raise fees for extraction on public lands for the first time in more than 100 years. That modest hike would raise $1.8 billion through 2031. For reference, Chevron alone made $35.5 billion in profits last year. “Since Day One, the Biden administration has hampered American energy—canceling the Keystone XL pipeline project, limiting production on federal lands and more,” API executive vice president and chief advocacy officer Amanda Eversole wrote in a blog post on Monday. “Now they are continuing their crusade against domestic oil and natural gas.” Core to the industry’s apocalyptic talking points has been the idea that markets are underinvesting in oil and gas development, threatening a supply crunch that could send fuel prices skyrocketing. API and others in the industry argue that trend has been due to the White House creating an uncertain environment for investors through bad vibes and regulations, despite the administration’s continued appeals to the industry and unprecedented subsidies. Chevron CEO Mike Wirth has complained in recent months that governments’ hasty embrace of climate policy has created a world where spending on fossil fuels is “woefully short, trillions of dollars short,” pointing to the fact that investment in exploration and production is about half of what it was in the years before the pandemic… “And fossil fuel executives have proven all too eager to lay blame at the feet of the administration for the sob story they’re trying to tell. In a letter sent to Biden amid rising fuel prices last year, Wirth accused the administration of seeking “to criticize, and at times vilify, our industry.” He added that “bringing prices down and increasing supply will require a change in approach,” imploring the White House to offer “cooperation and support” to the energy sector. What’s troubling is that the administration still seems to be buying the industry’s false underinvestment narrative too, rankled by the prospect of higher gas prices.”