oil and gas

Vermont Guard responds to flooding in Vermont

April 2, 2024

Vermont advances bill targeting oil and gas companies for climate cleanup

By Dana Drugmand

In the aftermath of costly flooding that swept the US Northeast last year, lawmakers in Vermont on Tuesday advanced a proposed new law that aims to make fossil fuel companies liable for the costs of cleaning up communities battered by climate change-related events.

In a 26-3 vote, the state senate passed what state lawmakers are calling the “Climate Superfund Act.” If the bill becomes law, it would be the first of its kind in the country, imposing strict liability for carbon pollution on large oil and gas companies that produce carbon-based fuels. Like the federal Superfund program that holds polluters liable for hazardous waste contamination, the “climate superfund” concept proposes to replicate this polluter pays program for climate pollution.

“I’m proud to vote yes today to respond to the greatest overarching existential threat of our time,” Vermont Sen. Becca White said following the vote.

The measure now moves on to the Vermont House of Representatives, where support appears strong.

“This is a bill that had a lot of support going into the session,” said Ben Edgerly Walsh, climate and energy program director at Vermont Public Interest Research Group. “We’re pretty optimistic that the House is going to take it up and move it before the end of the session.”

Last July, exceedingly heavy rainfall led to damaging flooding in the US Northeast, submerging streets in Vermont’s capital city of Montpelier, as well as thousands of acres of farmland across the state. One hard-hit farming operation, the Intervale Community Farm in Burlington, Vermont, lost an estimated $200,000 of its vegetable crops when 99% of the farm flooded.

Vermont’s bill would assess a one-time fee on fossil fuel companies responsible for more than 1 billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the last 30 years. The bill leaves the task of determining which companies would pay, and how much each would owe, to the state’s Agency of Natural Resources and the state treasurer, as well as the task of calculating Vermont’s costs of recovering from and adapting to climate impacts.

February 28, 2024

New report questions USDA support for certain climate “smart” practices

A new analysis of US Department of Agriculture (USDA) funding for “climate-smart” conservation practices argues that several are unlikely to actually have climate benefits and one may even increase harmful emissions, though government officials say the analysis is deeply flawed and based on “incorrect assumptions.”

With nearly $20 billion from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) to be used between 2023 and 2026, the USDA is investing more money than ever in combating greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, which makes up 10% of US emissions, according to the EPA.

The analysis from the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a nonprofit environmental research and advocacy organization examines elements of the USDA’s Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), which provides funding for conservation practices. Congress designated $8.45 billion for EQIP specifically. As part of that, an increasing amount of money is going towards so-called “climate-smart” practices aimed at sequestering carbon in soil or reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

EWG said that USDA is allowing farmers to claim this climate funding for implementing many practices that are unproven to help reduce emissions.

The report alleges, for example, that money can go toward a waste storage facility, used for livestock, would likely increase greenhouse gas emissions, according to the USDA’s own data.

The USDA expanded its “climate-smart” list – the specific practices that are eligible for funding – to allow 15 provisional practices, on which the USDA currently lacks data about their effect on emissions, EWG noted in its report.

USDA Press Secretary Allan Rodriguez called EWG’s analysis “fundamentally flawed, speculative, and rest on incorrect assumptions.”

“Unfortunately, EWG did not take into account the rigorous, science-based methodology used by USDA to determine eligible practices, nor the level of specificity required during the implementation process to ensure the practices’ climate-smart benefits are being maximized,” Rodriguez said in an emailed statement.

The single largest conservation practice funded over the past six years is the use of cover crops, according to EWG, with $505 million (9% of overall funding) going toward the practice. The use of cover crops is widely considered a strongly beneficial practice for soil health and sequestering carbon.

But only one of the other top 10 uses of the money is on the climate-smart list. Six of the new “provisional” practices were also in the top 10.

February 23, 2024

Postcard from California: After plastic bag ban backfires, lawmakers seek a fix

By Bill Walker

Ten years ago, Californians threw away an estimated 157,000 tons of plastic bags, about 8 pounds for each person in the state. To stem the tide of polyethylene piling up in landfills, polluting parks and beaches, and imperiling wildlife, that year California enacted the nation’s first statewide ban on single-use plastic grocery bags.

It didn’t work.

In 2021, the latest year for which figures are available, Californians tossed out more than 231,000 tons of plastic bags – almost 12 pounds per person.

Now lawmakers in Sacramento are trying again.

A pair of bills introduced earlier this month – SB 1053 and AB 2236 – would ban the use of all plastic bags by groceries and other stores that sell food. That means not only the flimsy single-use bags covered by the 2014 law, but also the thicker bags that technically can be reused and recycled, but almost never are.

The thicker bags, of the more durable polyethene called HDPE, carry the familiar, but often misleading, “chasing arrows” recycling symbol. But they can’t go in curbside recycling bins, and good luck finding a store that will take them back or a recycling center that will accept them. They’re designed to be reused up to 20 times, but most consumers toss them as soon as they unload their groceries at home.

“A plastic bag has an average lifespan of 12 minutes and then it is discarded… clogging sewage drains, contaminating our drinking water and degenerating into toxic microplastics that fester in our oceans and landfills for up to 1,000 years,” state Sen. Catherine Blakespear, co-author of SB 1053, said in a press release. “It’s time to improve on California’s original plastic bags ban and do it right this time.”

What went wrong? What happened to turn the state’s good intentions into a disheartening lesson in the law of unintended consequences?

Enter the plastics industry.

February 16, 2024

Plastics industry engaged in 50 years of fraud over recycling, report alleges

By Dana Drugmand

Plastics makers and petrochemical industry players have engaged in a decades-long fraud aimed at deceiving the public about plastic recycling, according to a new report that spotlights freshly uncovered industry communications and internal documents.

The report comes as the global plastic waste crisis deepens, and as environmental advocacy organizations are increasingly calling for major fossil fuel and petrochemical companies to be held responsible for plastic pollution that poses a threat to human and planetary health.

“Despite their long-standing knowledge that recycling plastic is neither technically nor economically viable, petrochemical companies—independently and through their industry trade associations and front groups—have engaged in fraudulent marketing and public education campaigns designed to mislead the public about the viability of plastic recycling,” asserts the new report, released by the Center for Climate Integrity (CCI) on Thursday.

In detailing the plastics industry’s campaign of deception that dates back more than 50 years, the report reveals how the industry deployed a familiar strategic playbook to push back on threats of regulation by promoting a misleading narrative and false claims pertaining to plastics and recycling, despite knowing all along that plastics’ recyclability was more of a public relations message than an effective solution to the waste management problem.

“This evidence shows that many of the same fossil fuel companies that knew and lied for decades about how their products cause climate change have also known and lied to the public about plastic recycling,” CCI President Richard Wiles said in a statement. “When corporations and trade groups know that their products pose grave risks to society, and then lie to the public and policymakers about it, they must be held accountable.”

May 19, 2023

Vast majority of global methane emissions go unregulated, says new study

By Grace van Deelen

Governments around the world are failing to effectively regulate and mitigate harmful emissions of methane, a greenhouse gas with a climate warming potential more than 25 times stronger than carbon dioxide, according to research published Friday.

Only 13% of global emissions from methane are covered by existing public mitigation policies, the researchers reported in the journal One Earth.

“Significant and underexplored [methane] mitigation opportunities exist,” the authors wrote.

The research comes on the heels of a report issued Thursday from the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) showing that methane emissions from just 1,100 US landfills have a climate-warming effect equivalent to the yearly emissions of 66 million gas-powered vehicles.

Methane makes up about 12% of US greenhouse gas emissions stemming from human activities, including agricultural operations, fossil fuel extraction and use, waste management practices, and decay of organic waste in municipal solid waste landfills. Agriculture is the largest single US source of methane emissions, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Global methane emissions are currently rising faster than at any point since the 1980s. To try to keep global warming from exceeding the warming limit of 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit set by the Paris Agreement, global methane emissions must be reduced by at least 40-45% of 2020 levels by 2030, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

May 2, 2023

Outrage over fresh chemical leak at Shell plastics plant

By Dana Drugmand

When Shell Chemical Appalachia announced the start of a massive plastics manufacturing facility last November in western Pennsylvania, the subsidiary of oil major Shell described it as “world-class,” and touted the company’s “strong and innovative safety focus.”

But now, just six months later, the plant has been the site of multiple malfunctions, including the leakage of benzene, a known carcinogen, along with other pollutants last month. The events come with putrid chemical odors and have area resident fearing for their health and calling on state officials to shut the plant down.

“We’re being told everything is ok, everything is safe, and it’s not,” said Hilary Flint, a cancer survivor who said she worries daily about how the malfunctions at the Shell plant may be affecting her health. Though she lives several miles away, she often spends time visiting her partner in Monaca, the community neighboring the Shell plant. Flint said both she and her partner contracted respiratory illnesses the week of the Shell plant’s chemical leak.

April 3, 2023

Harmful emissions from Gulf oil and gas production far higher than EPA reports, study finds

By Shannon Kelleher

Offshore oil and gas operations in the Gulf of Mexico are releasing far higher quantities of a potent greenhouse gas than regulators have estimated, according to a new study published Monday.

The analysis reveals that the climate change impact of these activities is more than double what official estimates suggest.

The study, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that 2021 calculations by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – using data from the US Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) – correctly estimated carbon dioxide emissions but underestimated methane emissions.

The data, which is based on engineering information, rather than on-site observations, failed to capture methane emissions because an older type of shallow-water platform used in offshore drilling often behaves like a “super-emitter,” leaking large amounts of the greenhouse gas, said Alan Gorchov Negron, a PhD candidate at the University of Michigan and first author of the study. These platforms are central hub gathering and processing facilities, which collect oil and gas through pipelines that extend from smaller nearby platforms.

“They’re a fraction of the platforms in the Gulf of Mexico but they contribute disproportionately to the total methane emissions and total greenhouse gas emissions,” said Negron.

“We don’t know exactly why the methane emissions are higher than what the inventory expects,” he added. “It’s either because of unknown emissions or unreported emissions.

October 28, 2022

Postcard from California: Carbon capture won’t solve climate crisis

Four miles from my house, a Silicon Valley company wants to drill an 8,000-foot-deep well to store millions of tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), the greenhouse gas identified as the main cause of the climate crisis.

The well, planned at the site of a former Army ammunition plant in Riverbank, Calif., could be one of a network of CO2 storage wells California is hoping will help the state reach its ambitious climate goals.

The idea is to trap emissions from petrochemical refineries, power plants and other industrial and agricultural sources, super-chill them into liquids that are piped through earthquake-vulnerable terrain, and pumped deep underground to to keep them from heating up the atmosphere.

This Rube Goldberg-like scheme is called carbon capture and sequestration. The captured CO2 can also be used in other industrial processes. A related scheme, direct air capture, sounds even more like science fiction, making use of giant vacuums to suck existing CO2 out of the atmosphere.

At first carbon capture may sound like a smart idea: The company seeking a permit to drill in Riverbank is named Aemetis, which it says means “one prudent wisdom.” But the type of carbon capture Gov. Gavin Newsom’s climate policy counts on to reach “net-zero” CO2 emissions by 2045, is neither wise or prudent.

August 12, 2022

House vote on Inflation Reduction Act sets stage for big climate gains

With the US House of Representatives positioned to approve on Friday the largest investment by the US government to combat climate change, some analysts are projecting the measures contained in the landmark Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) could reduce greenhouse gas emissions even more than the government has projected.

The measure, which passed the US Senate on Sunday, contains $369 billion earmarked for a range of energy and climate investments over the next decade.

The bill could slash emissions from the electricity sector by as much as 75% below levels seen in 2005 by 2030, according to Kevin Rennert, a fellow at Resources for the Future, based on an initial analysis. Absent the new investment, their forecast predicted that current policies would cut emissions more modestly — about 48.5%. Rennert shared these numbers during a seminar this week sponsored by Resources for the Future.

The US government has said the measures would cut greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2030.

The bill expands a tax credit for carbon capture, incentivizes the production of sustainable aviation fuel, provides for grant programs aimed at decarbonizing emissions-heavy sectors, and includes a methane reduction program for oil and gas facilities, among other provisions.

June 6, 2022

EPA’s biofuel targets are not achievable, refiners say

The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) new biofuels production targets announced last week are unachievable and “bewildering” given already high fuel costs, according to leading refinery industry players.

In the renewable fuel standard (RFS) rule unveiled on Friday, the EPA established a total renewable fuel goal for 2022 at 20.63 billion gallons. The agency also set a cellulosic biofuel goal at 0.63 billion gallons; a goal for biomass-based diesel at 2.76 billion gallons; and an advanced biofuel goal at 5.63 billion gallons.