Endangered Lizard Threatens Oil and Gas Development in the Permian Basin

IT'S THE OTHER WAY AROUND
 Irina Slav - May 20, 2024


• 
  
• The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the dunes sagebrush lizard as endangered, threatening oil and gas development in the Permian Basin.
• 
  
• The oil and gas industry argues they've made conservation efforts and the lizard's habitat is minimal in the basin.
• 
  
• Environmentalists see the listing as a win but worry about delayed protection and future development restrictions.

A rare lizard that lives in Texas and New Mexico has become the latest potential threat to oil and gas production growth in the Permian.

The dunes sagebrush lizard was granted endangered status by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service last week, prompting an outcry from the industry, which warned the change in the lizard's status would be detrimental to its activity in the most prolific shale play in the country.

According to the Fish and Wildlife Service, the dunes sagebrush lizard occurs in about 4% of the lands that comprise the Permian Basin. The service also acknowledged that many oil and gas operators are already taking part in voluntary conservation efforts to preserve the species' habitat. Yet now, these appear to have been deemed insufficient, prompting a sharp response from the industry.

"We are extremely disappointed in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) decision to again list the Dunes Sagebrush Lizard as Endangered in the Permian Basin," the president of the Permian Basin Petroleum Association told energy analyst and consultant David Blackmon for a story published in Forbes.

"In spite of the successful conservation efforts on the ground for over a decade and that less than two years ago approving a conservation plan for the Lizard that all parties agreed would conserve habitat," he added.

The president of the U.S. Oil and Gas Association was even blunter, telling Blackmon that "Anti-energy activists have been desperate to shut down drilling in the Permian Basin for years," despite voluntary efforts and investments on the part of oil and gas operators in the area to save the rare species.

"Texas oil and gas operators spent tens of millions of dollars in voluntary conservation efforts to protect the dunes sagebrush lizard. Environmental groups meanwhile added nothing to the conservation efforts but petitions and lawsuits," Tim Stewart said.

At first glance, the reaction of the oil and gas industry may seem excessive in the context of how little of the Permian the dunes sagebrush lizard actually inhabits. But this perception may be wrong, with the Fish and Wildlife Service noting that oil and gas activity is the prime suspect for the species' "functional extinction" across almost half of its habitat.

There is also a recent example of how environmentalists can interfere with the energy industry's activities: the suspension of new liquefied natural gas export terminals that President Biden signed earlier this year was the direct result of activist pressure.

"Even if there were no further expansion of the oil and gas or sand mining industry, the existing footprint of these operations will continue to negatively affect the dunes sagebrush lizard into the future," the Fish and Wildlife Service said in its announcement and it is little wonder that the industry took this as ominous.

Even more ominously for oil and gas operators, the USFWS may yet add to its decision a designation of critical habitat for the dunes sagebrush lizard. That would be a move that, Blackmon warns, "could become extremely limiting to any future development of the massive oil and natural gas resources known to exist beneath the region."

While the energy industry fumes at the decision, environmentalists were understandably happy. "The dunes sagebrush lizard spent far too long languishing in a Pandora's box of political and administrative back and forth even as its population was in free-fall towards extinction," a regional director for Defenders of Wildlife said, as quoted by the AP.

"I'm relieved the precious dunes sagebrush lizard is finally on the path to protection," Michael Robinson, senior conservation advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity, said, as quoted by Forbes. "I'm saddened and disgusted, however, that the Service allowed the lizard's habitat to be destroyed for decades."

What follows next would become clear in two months. One thing is for sure, however. Activists will likely become bolder like they did after the LNG approval suspension. They have now focused their efforts on making sure the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission enforces new air pollution rules approved by the EPA earlier this year.

According to these rules, the maximum level of fine particulate matter in the air is now 9 micrograms per cubic meter, down from 12 micrograms previously—and FERC already tapped one LNG producer as its first target. Venture Global was recently served with a request to provide proof its particulate matter emissions were below 9 micrograms per cubic meter.

"FERC is going to have to take this issue seriously and is going to have to analyze whether these projects are in the public interest given this new reality," a Sierra Club attorney told the Financial Times.

"We plan to hold FERC's feet to the fire to ensure that it follows through and satisfies its legal obligations," Tom Gosselin also said.

One question that might be worth asking is when conservationists would become this vocal about the fate of bats and birds of prey that are being killed by onshore wind turbines and the whale deaths linked to offshore wind development.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

Dunes sagebrush lizard now an endangered species

Adrian Hedden, Carlsbad Current-Argus
Thu, May 23, 2024

A lizard native to southeast New Mexico’s Permian Basin was afforded the highest level of federal protections aimed at preventing its extinction, triggering concerns that landowners and industries in the area could see added restrictions on access to the land.

The dunes sagebrush lizard was listed as endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act, per a decision issued May 17 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. An endangered listing means the agency believed extinction of the species was imminent, and requires the federal government establish and recovery plan and potential “critical habitat” where the lizard would be recovered.

This could restrict some uses of the land, namely oil and gas drilling and farming and ranching, and the move drew fears that the economic drivers of the region could be stymied for environmental conservation.

Emily Wirth, executive director of the Center for Excellence (CEHMM) said voluntary conservation practices intended to protect the lizard were underway by industry since 2008. She said candidate conservation agreements (CCAs) facilitated by CEHMM saw 3.1 million acres in New Mexico enrolled in the agreements, including 90 oil and gas companies.

Via CEHMM, enrollees moved 650 oil wells out of lizard habitat, Wirth said, aside from other wells operators moved on their own.

The dunes sagebrush lizard is a small, light brown phrynosomatid lizard (family Phrynosomatidae, genus Sceloporus). Shinnery oaks provide food, shade and a breeding ground for the Dunes sagebrush Lizard.

She said it was “disappointing” that these efforts did not prevent a listing which Wirth worried could negatively impact land access.

“I think it’s very disappointing given the conservation efforts that have been ongoing since 2008,” she said. “The biggest thing we can do for the lizard is avoidance of habitat. “The industry has proactively been doing that on their own. It’s really disappointing the conservation efforts were not taken into account.”

With said landowners and operators can still enroll in CEHMM’s contracts ahead of the listing taking effect about 30 days after the announcement, and those enrolled will face no additional restrictions.

She pointed to a previous listing of the lizard in 2012, which was overturned, Wirth said, due to the ongoing conservation efforts taken by industry.

“Nothing has changed. To me, it doesn’t really make sense for the current listing in New Mexico specifically,” Wirth said. “We’re keeping industry on the ground working in the face of a listing. They have protections. Our agreements are the perfect balance by allowing conservation and economic development on the land.”

More: White nose syndrome kills millions of bats each year. Now it's in Lincoln National Forest.

Lizard protection opposed by oil and gas industry

The decision to list the lizard came after a 90-day public comment period, and a “rigorous review” of the scientific and commercial information, read the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announcement. The agency said critical habitat was expected to be designated, but not at the time of the listing decision.

The lizard is found only in the shinnery oak and sand dune ecosystems in southeast New Mexico and West Texas, occurring in about 4% of the 86,000 square miles that make up the Permian Basin, read the agency’s report. Key threats to the species were oil and gas development, mining and climate change, the report read.

The Fish and Wildlife Service said about 85% of the lizard’s range are covered by voluntary enrollments in programs like CEHMM’s, noting horizontal drilling techniques can often target underground oil reserves without locating wells within lizard habitat.

Amy Lueders, southwest regional director with the Services said the federal government expected to continue working with industry and landowners to conserve the species and restore its population.

“The Endangered Species Act is an important tool in preventing the extinction of imperiled species like the dunes sagebrush lizard,” she said. “The Service will continue working collaboratively with Tribes, industry, stakeholders, and private landowners while ensuring protections for the lizard and its habitat.”

Listing the dunes sagebrush lizard as endangered was celebrated by conservation groups, arguing stronger efforts were needed to prevent extinction. Michael Robinson with the Center for Biological Diversity in Silver City said the listing decision was delayed for decades but would help save the lizard.

“After four decades of the government sitting on its hands, these lizards are finally protected from oil spills and giant machines scooping up sand,” Robinson said. “Designating critical habitat will close any loopholes that might still allow the destruction of the beautiful oak-dotted dunes where these animals live.”

The listing was opposed by oil and gas industry leaders in New Mexico. In comments submitted Oct. 2, 2023 the Independent Petroleum Association of New Mexico (IPANM) argued oil and gas was produced “responsibly” in dunes sagebrush lizard habitat, pointing to the CCAs the trade group’s member companies already participated in.

IPANM was joined by national fossil fuel groups the American Petroleum Institute and Western Energy Alliance in submitting comments against the listing when it was proposed last year.

IPANM Executive Director Jim Winchester wrote that the Fish and Wildlife Service should withdraw the listing decision as he said it would increase costs for operators, delay projects and create regulatory uncertainty for company’s operating in New Mexico.

“An endangered listing will have a significant impact on the IPANM members business planning and operations by increasing operational costs, delaying project timeframes, and limiting or precluding operations in certain areas, he wrote.

“In particular, the proposed rule makes arbitrary conclusions based on use of inaccurate habitat mapping, and significantly outdated forecasts on energy development based upon development practices no longer employed in west Texas and eastern New Mexico.”

Adrian Hedden can be reached at achedden@currentargus.com or @AdrianHedden on the social media platform X.

This article originally appeared on Carlsbad Current-Argus: Oil and gas against dunes sagebrush lizard protection in New Mexico

Texas lizard added to endangered species list over the oil and gas industry’s objections

The dunes sagebrush lizard lives in the same West Texas land that supports the state’s biggest oil and gas fields, and industry leaders say the new designation will hurt drilling and production.

BY ALEJANDRA MARTINEZ AND CARLOS NOGUERAS RAMOS
MAY 22, 2024

The dunes sagebrush lizard, which lives in the oil-rich Permian Basin, has been listed as endangered after a decades-long effort. Credit: Ryan Hagerty/USFWS

\
ODESSA — The dunes sagebrush lizard burrows its coarse, spiny body to cool down and sometimes conserve heat way deep beneath the sand dunes in the Mescalero-Monahans ecosystem 30 miles west of this West Texas city.

But the 2.5-inch-long lizard’s home — sandy mounds studded with low-lying shinnery oak trees — is being disrupted as the oil and gas industry expands, posing a grave threat to its survival, federal regulators and scientists said.

After four decades of warnings by biologists about the existential threat that oil and gas exploration and development poses on the reptile’s habitat, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service declared the rare lizard endangered last week.

Industry representatives have for years fought against the designation saying it would scare off companies interested in drilling inside the nation’s most lucrative oil and natural gas basin.

The listing requires oil and gas companies to avoid operating in areas the lizard inhabits, but the Fish and Wildlife Service has yet to determine where those areas are because it is still gathering information, according to Beth Ullenberg, a spokesperson for the Service.

Should the energy industry encroach on the lizard’s habitat, they could incur fines up to $50,000 and prison time, depending on the violation. However, Ullenberg said the agency would work with companies to avoid penalties.

In a statement, the Fish and Wildlife Service said oil and gas operators can use horizontal drilling to reach oil and gas deposits without disrupting the lizard’s habitat.

The lizard only lives in about 4% of the 86,000-square-mile Permian Basin, which spans across Texas and New Mexico, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service. In Texas, the lizard has been found in Andrews, Crane, Gaines, Ward and Winkler counties.

Lee Fitzgerald, a professor at Texas A&M University who has studied the lizard since 1994, said that drilling a single oil well does not impact the lizard’s survival, but the fragmentation of its habitat by the oil and gas industry’s infrastructure — including the roads leading to drill sites — isolates the reptiles and prevents them from finding mates beyond those already living close by.

Fitzgerald compared the oil and gas infrastructure to urban sprawl.

“If you build one house, it's not a problem,” he said. “But you build 1,000 houses, and every one of them has a driveway, and every one of them has a street, connecting it to more houses then you get urban sprawl. And if you do that in the shinnery oak sand dunes then the lizards disappear.”

There are few remaining lizards and they are hard to find, making it difficult to count them accurately. According to a 2023 analysis by the Fish and Wildlife Service, the lizards are “functionally extinct” across 47% of its range.

Fitzgerald said the population estimates of the lizard don’t matter.

“The lizard is just one piece of the puzzle that is disappearing,” he said. “It's out there, it's alive. We should be proud of it, that we have it, and it's so special. So, it's more about the non-monetary values of the lizard as it is part of the big picture of biodiversity.”
Listing could cause disruption in oil production

The decision to categorize the lizard as a species in danger of extinction was unwelcome news for oil and gas industry leaders, who said federal regulators provided insufficient guidance for operators to evaluate how to decide where to build service roads and where to drill. Members of the industry also said they’re skeptical of the science supporting the designation.

“I think that the lizard is not in danger of extinction,” said Ben Shepperd, president of the Permian Basin Petroleum Association.

The ramifications of the listing won’t be immediate, but it could have lasting impacts on the future of oil and gas extraction, Shepperd said, adding that it could affect a company’s ability to drill without running afoul of federal requirements under the Endangered Species Act.

“Not overnight, but over the coming months, we believe that that's going to lead to a decrease in drilling. We believe it's going to lead to … job losses,” Shepperd said.

In a joint statement with the Texas Oil and Gas Association, delivered to the federal agency last year, energy industry leaders argued that oil and gas companies were already taking measures to prevent further disturbing the lizard’s habitat: a 200-meter buffer between their operations and the lizard’s home, minimizing their presence in the area and using existing service roads as opposed to building more.

Industry representatives also said that oil and gas companies had been participating in voluntary conservation agreements, a program in which companies and private landowners pledge to protect the lizard’s habitat. Environmentalists have criticized the agreements because there is no enforcement or penalties if companies do not comply — or a way to determine whether the plans are effective.

State and nationwide oil and gas associations have not ruled out litigation, Shepperd said.

Scott Lauermann, a spokesperson for the American Petroleum Institute, said the decision could delay the permits that companies need for every phase of oil and gas exploration and extraction.

Such permits could authorize companies to build the infrastructure necessary to pump oil like oil rigs and service roads. Federal officials encouraged companies to consult the agency early in their planning.
The lizard wars

Ten generations of lizards have lived and died while a battle ensued between environmental groups, the oil and gas industry and the federal government over their protection.

Fish and Wildlife first identified the dunes sagebrush lizard as needing protection in 1982. Since then, it has been removed and added multiple times from the candidate list for endangered species, but the proposals fell through because the Fish and Wildlife Service said it could not afford to evaluate whether the lizard should have been placed on the list, said Michael Robinson, a senior conservation advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity. The Center has petitioned and sued the Fish and Wildlife Service several times over almost two decades regarding the lizard.

In 2002, the center delivered a scientific petition to the Fish and Wildlife Service, asking the agency to add the lizard to the endangered species list. The Service did not act, citing a lack of resources, Robinson said.

The Service proposed adding the lizard to the endangered species list again in 2010 but withdrew the proposal 18 months later.

Instead, then-Texas Comptroller Susan Combs assembled voluntary conservation agreements — a pledge by landowners and operators to avoid activities like removing shinnery oak trees and building roads — to convince the federal government to avoid listing the lizard as endangered, a decision that drew praise from the oil and gas industry and rebuke from environmentalists and wildlife conservation groups.

State and federal officials argued the move would be enough to protect the lizard. More than 200 ranchers and oil and gas companies between Texas and New Mexico, federal officials said.

Shepperd said that among them were Chevron, ExxonMobil and Occidental Petroleum.

Robinson argued that the agreements shielded the oil and gas industry from making modest changes to their daily operations.

“It’s a sad case of a federal agency that has been captured by the industries they’re supposed to hold to account,” Robinson said.

In 2018, the Center for Biological Diversity petitioned again for the lizard’s protection. In 2022, the Center sued the Fish and Wildlife Service again, a lawsuit that resulted in a settlement agreement, which led to another proposal to add the lizard to the endangered species list.

Ullenberg, the Fish and Wildlife Service spokesperson, said that petition prompted the agency to conduct a review of the species and ultimately add it to the endangered list last week.

Robinson said it's an important first step.

“At least the government’s attention will be focused on the project of [recovering] the species, and that’s no small thing,” he said.

Disclosure: Ben Shepperd, Exxon Mobil Corporation, Permian Basin Petroleum Association and Texas A&M University have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.


Information about the authors


Alejandra Martinez
ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTER
alejandra.martinez@texastribune.org
@alereports

Carlos Nogueras Ramos
PERMIAN BASIN REPORTER
carlos.nogueras@texastribune.org
@criacuervosvibe

 The Texas Tribune’s 

 

First Hydrogen-Fueled Vessel Receives USCG Approval to Enter Service

Sea Change will begin a demonstration service in San Francisco after receiving its USCG certificates (SWITCH)

PUBLISHED MAY 21, 2024 12:36 PM BY THE MARITIME EXECUTIVE

 

 

After nearly five years of development and several delays, the first hydrogen-powered commercial vessel in the United States has received U.S. Coast Guard approval to enter service. Developed by a startup called SWITCH Maritime, the vessel a 75-passenger catamaran ferry Sea Change was presented last Friday with its Certificate of Inspection by Captain Taylor Lam, USCG Sector San Francisco commander and Captain of the Port for Northern California.

With the COI, the vessel is now able to commence commercial operation for zero-emission public ferry service. Following a formal launch event in June, the Sea Change will be operated in a six-month pilot service by the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA). After the initial demonstration period, SWITCH will put the vessel into a more permanent ferry route.

“This COI represents the culmination of years of close collaboration with the US Coast Guard and a significant milestone for the maritime industry, demonstrating the viability of carbon-neutral vessels,” said Pace Ralli, CEO of SWITCH. “We are immensely grateful for the support from the US Coast Guard and all our partners along the path to completion. This is not the finish line, but just a starting point from which to build many more.”

Ralli highlights the rapid evolution of the technology. He said they are already able to provide similar operational capabilities and ranges to diesel-powered vessels. The hydrogen system also eliminates the need for shoreside charging infrastructure required by battery-only vessels.

 

Sea Change is the first hydrogen-powered vessel in the U.S. (SWITCH)

 

The Sea Change uses hydrogen fuel cells to power all-electric motors for transit distances up to 300 nautical miles and speeds up to 15 knots. Built and launched at All American Marine shipyard in Bellingham, Washington, in August 2021, the Sea Change is a 70-foot catamaran ferry designed by Incat Crowther. There have been significant hurdles and developing the technology and gaining approval. The vessel reached the San Francisco Bay Area just over a year ago with SWITCH working to train the crew and complete USCG certification.

The vessel features an integrated hydrogen power system from Zero Emission Industries, with 360kW of fuel cells from Cummins and 600kW of electric motor propulsion from BAE Systems. Its tanks from Hexagon Purus have a capacity for 242kg of hydrogen stored in a gaseous form on the top deck at a pressure of 250 bar.  

There are so far only a handful of hydrogen-powered vessels in the world although supports highlight the potential for the industry. Founded in 2018, SWITCH Maritime develops, finances, builds and leases zero-emission maritime vessels to existing operators in the U.S. and internationally. SWITCH has reported it is actively working on additional expansion designs for 150-, 300- and 450-passenger zero-emission ferries.

KR Guide to Select Thermal Properties for Cryogenic Insulation Materials

Cover of the report

PUBLISHED MAY 22, 2024 4:39 PM BY THE MARITIME EXECUTIVE

 

[By: Korean Register]

KR has published the Guide to Selection of Thermal Properties of Cryogenic Insulation Materials for safe storage of cryogenic fuels, including LNG and liquid hydrogen.

Last year, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) adopted the '2023 Greenhouse Gas Strategy' with the goal of achieving carbon neutrality in international shipping by 2050. The strategy aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 20%, striving for 30%, by 2030, at least 70%, striving for 80%, by 2040, and to achieve net-zero emissions by around 2050.

In response to these increasingly stringent environmental regulations, the maritime industry is focusing not only on the widely used liquefied natural gas (LNG) but also on the long-term use of alternative fuels such as hydrogen and ammonia. In particular, there is a rising emphasis on insulation system technology to ensure the safe and efficient storage of cryogenic low- and zero- carbon fuels.

Representative cryogenic fuels include LNG and liquid hydrogen. Hydrogen is a liquid below its boiling point of -253°C, which is about 90°C lower than the boiling point of LNG at -162°C, requiring advanced insulation technology. Since liquefied hydrogen reduces its volume by about 800 times compared to its gaseous state, securing stable storage technology on ships would enable the affordable import and utilization of hydrogen through marine transport, while also facilitating the implementation of Republic of Korea's Hydrogen Economy Roadmap (2019).

To develop insulation system technology that is essential for the use of cryogenic low- and zero- carbon fuels, KR partnered with researchers from the Korea Institute of Machinery & Materials (KIMM), Pusan National University (PNU), and the Seoul National University of Science and Technology (SEOULTECH) to publish the report.

The report describes the insulation system used in ships for -162°C LNG and -253°C liquefied hydrogen, and analyzes environmental factors influencing the heat transfer mechanisms of the system and other design elements.

KIM Daeheon, Executive Vice President of KR's R&D Division, stated, "This technical guide is expected to serve as the standard for material selection during the design of insulation systems in cryogenic environments or the development of innovative insulation systems. KR will continue to provide alternative fuel technology services, driving decarbonization of the maritime sector and aligning with evolving maritime technology through various R&D activities.”

The document can be downloaded on the KR Decarbonization Portal (decarbonization.krs.co.kr/eng/).

The products and services herein described in this press release are not endorsed by The Maritime Executive.

Trump's biggest campaign promise would cause 'economic disaster': analysis

Travis Gettys
May 21, 2024 

Donald Trump's promised crackdown on immigration could inflict mass misery and economic calamity, according to a new analysis.

The former president's radical plans for a potential second term in office include barring entry from select Muslim-majority nations, denying all asylum claims and rounding up millions of undocumented immigrants for deportation, and economic analyst Robert Shapiro warned in a new Washington Monthly column that these policies would set off an "economic disaster."

"By any measure, a policy that eliminated 4.5 percent of the current workforce, including large numbers of college and high school graduates, would set off serious economic tremors," Shapiro wrote.

"Using Okun’s Law on the relationship between rising unemployment and GDP, a 4.5 percent drop in employment is associated with depressing GDP growth by more than 9 percentage points. This estimate also includes the impact on other jobs. A recent study of much more modest programs to deport immigrants found clear evidence that they cost other American jobs. By one calculation, deporting 1 million immigrants would lead to 88,000 additional employment losses by other Americans, suggesting that Trump’s program could cost up to 968,000 Americans their jobs on top of the 7.1 million jobs held by immigrants up for deportation."

Contrary to popular misconception, only 4 percent of undocumented immigrants work in agriculture, while nearly a third of them work in the construction or hospitality industries and 14 percent of working unauthorized immigrants provide professional, scientific, technical or administrative services.

"Doing the math, we find that a mass deportation program could depress national wage and salary income by $317.2 billion or 2.7 percent of labor income in 2023," Shapiro wrote. "This would be a much larger percentage loss than during the 1980, 1991, and 2002 recessions. It also would be more than half the 5 percent decline in 2009 at the height of the Great Recession. By these measures, too, a severe recession would likely accompany Trump’s draconian program."

Mass deportation could potentially revive inflation, which happened when companies had to replace large numbers of workers after COVID-19 crested, and businesses would either have to pay more in overtime and recruitment or accept lower productivity, which all leads to higher prices for consumers.

"Mass deportations would involve enormous costs for taxpayers," Shapiro wrote. "One study found that apprehending, detaining, transporting, processing, and finally deporting unauthorized immigrants in 2015 cost the government an average of $18,214 per deportee or $24,094 in current dollars. Using the latest DHS estimates, the taxpayer costs to deport 11 million people would come to $265 billion—without including their American children or the costs to build and maintain large detention camps. For perspective, $265 billion is equivalent to 11 percent of all projected income tax revenues in 2024 and 30 percent of the Pentagon’s 2024 budget."

"Now, Trump seems determined to set new records for deportations," he added, "regardless of the costs to taxpayers and the economy."

Trump set to attend Big Oil fundraiser following quid pro quo offer

Edward Carver, Common Dreams
May 21, 2024 

Presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump will reportedly attend a fundraising luncheon organized by leading oil and gas executives in Houston on Wednesday, following a controversial offer he made to the industry to roll back environmental regulations in return for $1 billion in campaign donations—with two companies associated with both events.

At his Mar-a-Lago Club last month, Trump told a group of roughly two dozen oil and gas executives that $1 billion would be a "deal" for them, given how much money they would make in reduced taxes and regulations if he is elected, TheWashington Post first reported.

Top executives at Continental Resources and Occidental Petroleum, two of the companies with representatives reportedly present when the offer was made, are among the organizers of Wednesday's luncheon, according to The New York Times. Harold Hamm, the executive chairman and founder of Continental Resources and one of the luncheon's organizers, has been a longtime supporter of Trump; he spoke at the 2016 Republican convention.

Trump's campaign has raised about $7.3 million from the oil and gas industry in the 2024 election cycle, most of it since January, while President Joe Biden has taken in just $186,000, according to OpenSecrets data reported by the Times. These figures don't include money given to super PACs.

The industry has grown less supportive of Biden since his administration paused liquefied natural gas (LNG) export permits to certain countries in January, a move that was hailed by environmental campaigners.

"This LNG pause is a huge deal for climate and environmental justice," Tiernan Sittenfeld, the senior vice president of government affairs for the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), told the Times this week.

"Big Oil gave $6.4 million to Trump's 2024 campaign in just the first three months of 2024 alone," LCV said on social media Monday. "Make no mistake: Trump and his Big Oil friends are an existential threat to our communities, planet, and future."

The pause could affect the monumental profits of the oil and gas industry. Following the fracking boom of the last two decades, the U.S. has become the world's leading exporter of LNG. Qatar, the second-largest exporter, announced plans to increase production following the U.S. pause.

During the Trump presidency, LNG exports boomed and the tax cuts that he signed disproportionately benefited the industry. Trump presumably sought to capitalize on this history in making the quid pro quo offer, which Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) characterized as a case of "open corruption."

The quid pro quo offer was underreported by cable news, according to an analysis by Media Matters for America, but has been the subject of a congressional probe. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), ranking member of the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, sent letters to eight oil and gas firms reportedly present for the Mar-a-Lago offer and the American Petroleum Institute, a lobby group, requesting information about their financial arrangements with Trump. He expressed concern that they may have "accepted or facilitated Mr. Trump's explicit corrupt bargain."

The oil and gas industry stands to make $110 billion from tax breaks alone if Trump is elected, according to an analysis by Friends of the Earth Action released last week.

While Trump's quid pro quo offer was direct and nakedly transactional in a way that may be new, his party has long-standing oil industry ties.

"Maybe some of these Big Oil CEOs preferred a different candidate in the primary, but it was clear that they were always going to support the Republican nominee," LCV's Sittenfield said. "They are all about continuing to pad their already enormous profits at the expense of our climate."

Inside Donald Trump’s billion-dollar Big Oil heist
Sabrina Haake
May 19, 2024 

Then-President Donald Trump speaks to city officials and employees of Double Eagle Energy on the site of an active oil rig on July 29, 2020 in Midland, Texas. 

(Photo by Montinique Monroe/Getty Images


As soon as fossil-fuel financed Donald Trump was sworn into office, he got busy destroying the nation’s climate progress.

In June 2017, Trump announced that the United States would withdraw from the Paris Agreement, shamefully walking away from a global commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions — the only signatory country to do so.

Among Trump’s other early steps to halt climate progress: Scott Pruitt, his Environmental Protection Agency director, scrubbed climate science information off the agency’s website. Pruitt, who resigned under an unethical cloud of scandal the following year, “cleansed” (read: removed) federal data about fossil fuels and carbon emissions from web pages that had been educating the public since the late 1990s.

Going into the 2024 election, Trump is warring with climate science again. Even as global temperatures hover at a precarious tipping point endangering habitability, Trump has solicited a billion-dollar contribution from fossil fuel execs in exchange for letting the planet burn baby burn.

Trump’s lowly $1 billion price tag

At a shockingly under-reported event in April, the presumptive Republican nominee invited fossil fuel representatives to dine with him at Mar-a-Lago where he served up a foul tasting entrée of quid pro quo.

More than 20 oil executives from Chevron, ExxonMobil, Occidental Petroleum and other fossil fuel concerns attended.

Over a steak dinner, Trump offered attendees $110 billion in tax breaks and said he’d reverse Biden’s environmental protections. Trump also pledged to scrap President Joe Biden’s policies on electric vehicles and wind energy and other initiatives opposed by the fossil fuel industry, including legal barriers to drilling and the Biden administration’s rules designed to cut car pollution.

The catch: the oil barons must agree to donate a billion dollars to Trump’s presidential campaign.

Trump said it was a good “deal.” Ponying up $1 billion to get Trump re-elected would be advantageous for Big Oil, he promised, because the value of the tax and regulation cuts he’d give them in return would far exceed that amount, including new offshore drilling and speedier permits.

Forbes reported that during an Arizona campaign rally in 2020, Trump similarly suggested that he could offer ExxonMobil permits in exchange for a $25 million campaign contribution. Appalling and galling though it was, last month’s Mar-a-Lago Big Oil fete wasn’t the first time Trump’s open corruption jeopardized a livable planet.

Dr. Evil would have been proud.

Trump advances Big Oil’s disinformation campaign

Climate disinformation from the fossil fuel lobby is legion, and it has gone on for decades.

American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers has undertaken an extremely well-financed campaign against Biden’s EPA tailpipe rules, misleading consumers and voters by calling the rules a “ban” on “gas cars.” The lobby has purchased ads in battleground states to lie to voters about Biden’s efforts to increase the manufacture of EVs, claiming that increasing EV production and adopting the charging station infrastructure to support them will restrict consumer choice.

Their disinformation efforts are obscene because their profits are obscene.

Last year, ExxonMobil and Chevron reported their biggest annual profits in a decade. Three of the largest oil and gas producers reported combined profits of $85.6 billion in 2023. ExxonMobil reported $36 billion, while Chevron reported $21.4 billion. Shell’s reported profits were down from 2022 but still reflected the second-largest profits in a decade.


Then-President Donald Trump speaks to 5,000 contractors at the Shell Chemicals Petrochemical Complex on Aug. 13, 2019, in Monaca, Pa. President Donald Trump delivered a speech on the economy, and focused on manufacturing and energy sector jobs. (Photo by Jeff Swensen/Getty Images)

Under the Inflation Reduction Act, the oil industry also received hundreds of billions of dollars in new financial incentives to expand carbon-reducing technologies. Given that larger fossil fuel companies have already diversified into renewables, one would think they would lead the discussion on what an appropriate energy mix looks like, instead of falsely lambasting Democrats’ transition efforts.

The rub, it’s clear, is timing and greed. They want the U.S. to rely primarily on fossil fuels for several more decades, but by then, scientists warn, the transition will be too late.
Democrats investigate

Politico reported last week that oil executives are licking their chops, eagerly drafting industry-friendly executive orders Trump would sign as soon as he returns to office.

Democrats say not so fast.

After the Washington Post reported that Trump had offered to dismantle Biden’s environmental rules in exchange for $1 billion in campaign contributions, Democrats on the House oversight committee sent letters to nine oil executives asking about the Mar-a-Lago meeting.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) wrote in the committee’s letter that, “Media reports raise significant potential ethical, campaign finance, and legal issues that would flow from the effective sale of American energy and regulatory policy to commercial interests in return for large campaign contributions.”

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) said that “Trump’s offer of a blatant quid pro quo to oil executives is practically an invitation to ask questions about Big Oil’s political corruption and manipulation.”

The Houston Chronicle says Democrats are pearl clutching. While it is true that Democrats promise donors they will try to protect abortion access, there’s a vast moral and legal chasm between vowing to protect a fundamental human right — healthcare — and vowing to destroy a fundamental human right — breathable air.

A tale of two countries

Whether or not voters understand it, the climate contrast between Biden and Trump couldn’t be more dramatic.

Biden refers to global warming as an “existential threat” and has engaged in over 300 actions aimed to cut greenhouse gas emissions, reduce air pollution, restrict toxic chemicals and preserve public lands and waters. Biden’s administration has taken more action to combat climate change than any other administration in U.S. history. The Inflation Reduction Act led to record investment in solar, wind and increased EV sales.

Although these policies will take years to deliver climate results, by one early assessment, they have already resulted in a 3 percent cut in energy emissions.


President Joe Biden points to a wind turbine size comparison chart during a meeting about the Federal-State Offshore Wind Implementation Partnership in the Roosevelt Room of the White House June 23, 2022, in Washington, D,C. The White House is partnering with 11 East coast governors to launch a new Federal-State Offshore Wind Implementation Partnership to boost the offshore wind industry. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Trump, amplifying Big Oil’s decades-long disinformation campaign in exchange for money, has called climate change a “hoax.” At his New Jersey rally last week, Trump vowed to stop offshore wind “on day one.”

He has claimed without evidence that wind energy causes cancer, and that he knows “windmills very much,” because he has “studied it better than anybody I know.” Demonstrating the principles of Darwinism, Trump eliminated more than 125 environmental rules and policies during his time in office and is now promising more destruction.

In November, we will elect the president we deserve. Whether Trump or Biden is elected, both men are elderly. That means they will be gone long before the worst environmental disasters arrive.

The choice is before us. One of these candidates promises his grandchildren will eat from a golden plate. The other promises there will be something on the plate.

Sabrina Haake is a columnist and 25 year litigator specializing in 1st and 14th Amendment defense. Her Substack, The Haake, is free.

 

Winds of Change for Energy Ports

Petrochemical ports see new opportunities in clean energy

Houston's petrochemical operations

PUBLISHED MAY 19, 2024 1:14 PM BY TOM PETERS

 

(Article originally published in Mar/Apr 2024 edition.)

The global production of energy has taken a new twist: It has to be cleaner. Reducing carbon emissions and reaching “net zero” targets are terms becoming commonplace in the energy industry’s vocabulary.

Several U.S. ports that handle petroleum products or lease land to energy-producing companies are becoming more involved in the emissions reduction scenario, not only as depots for cleaner energy production but also as cleaner users. “Electric” seems to be the way to go – from drayage vehicles on docks moving containers to cranes and trucks and shore power for ships.

But not every port is following the conventional path in support of clean energy development.

Diverse Energy Needs

“As a bulk and breakbulk port, the Port of Beaumont is tied to energy in unexpected ways,” says Beaumont’s Port Director, Chris Fisher. “While aggregate, crude oil, wind turbine components and project cargo don’t seem related, they all support the diverse energy needs of the United States.” 

Beaumont moves over one million tons of aggregate annually, most of which supports multi-billion-dollar refinery and petrochemical facility expansion efforts by laying the groundwork for upgrades. Aggregate also supports the maritime transportation network by supplying the base material needed to construct critical highway and road infrastructure that leads directly to ports and other industrial facilities.

As wind projects have been all the rage, Beaumont’s heavy-lift capabilities moved wind turbine components that supported 30 wind projects in the U.S. Fisher adds that with more than $85 billion in announced industrial projects along the Sabine-Neches Waterway, including Port Arthur LNG and Golden Pass LNG, Beaumont is a top choice for moving project cargo in support of exports and global energy needs. And as an energy exporter, Beaumont’s Jefferson Energy liquid bulk terminal, a net exporter of crude oil, gasoline and yellow wax, realized a 331 percent increase in volume over the last five years.

Port Tampa Bay, which handles 18 million tons of petroleum products per year or over 45 percent of Florida’s total, recently received an economic shot in the arm when Overseas Shipholding Group (OSG), a leading provider of energy transportation services, announced plans to study the development of a proposed Tampa Regional Intermodal Carbon Hub.

According to a release, the study is intended to evaluate the commercial feasibility of developing an intermediate storage hub at Port Tampa Bay for CO2 captured from industrial emitters across Florida. The hub would initially receive, store and process two million metric tons of CO2 per year, which would ultimately be transported by OSG vessels across the Gulf of Mexico for permanent underground storage. 

It would be the first of its kind in the nation, and captured CO2 can actually be used in the production of synthetic fuels such as gasoline and diesel.

 

Petrochemical port operations in the Gulf of Mexico

 

Methanol and Wind

Port Lake Charles on the Gulf Coast of Louisiana has been chosen as the site of a planned major methanol plant to be built by Lake Charles Methanol II. The company plans to invest $3.24 billion to produce low-carbon intensity methanol and other chemicals.

“The proposed facility would reform natural gas and renewable gas feedstocks into hydrogen while capturing carbon dioxide, which would then be used to produce about 3.6 million tons per year of methanol,” it said in a statement.

Port Lake Charles’ Executive Director Richert Self adds, "This represents a significant capital investment for Southwest Louisiana. We’ll be involved in the export of three-to-four million tons of methanol per year. For the Port of Lake Charles, it’s yet another diversification of cargo. For years, we’ve handled petroleum coke and other fossil fuel-related energy cargoes, and methanol will complement that. It’s another area that displays that we’re truly an energy port.”

Port Lake Charles says another potential area of development may be offshore wind.

"Sites at the port’s industrial canal could become available to support the offshore wind industry as a marshaling and staging facility, an offshore wind component factory or both,” notes Director of Cargo & Trade Development Therrance Chretien.

The Port of Virginia, which is determined to become a net-zero operation by 2040, is transforming its Portsmouth Marine Terminal (PMT) into an offshore wind energy hub to support Dominion Energy’s Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (CVOW) project and many other projects expected to be built along the U.S. East Coast.

Port spokesman Joe Harris says the improvements there, in support of Dominion’s project, are on-time and on-budget. Virginia wants to establish itself as a Mid-Atlantic logistics hub for the offshore wind energy industry: “We’re supporting this industry by providing a modern platform from which private industry (Dominion) can safely and efficiently operate.”

The first few loads of monopiles, which are base units that attach to the seafloor, have arrived and are on-site. The monopiles are over 250 feet in length and weigh nearly 1,500 tons on average.

Dominion has leased 72 acres of PMT, which is being used for the staging and pre-assembly of the CVOW components. Harris says the overall construction project will last 2.5 years and consist of 176 offshore wind turbines situated on a lease site 27 miles off the coast of Virginia Beach. Port investment in the project is $220 million.

L.A. and Long Beach

Upgrading facilities that currently handle petroleum products is under way at the Port of Los Angeles, says Michael Galvin, Director of Waterfront and Commercial Real Estate. The port has seven marine oil terminals that provide local fuel outlets with crude and products like diesel.

Galvin notes, “There’s a transition going on to renewable fuels,” with less carbon intense production. However, “Those fuels are being imported into our facilities now to meet specific energy producers’ needs in relation to regulations here in the State of California.”

While the port is focused on upgrading its present marine petroleum facilities, storing and supplying components for the various offshore wind projects developing along the California coast has been on its radar. “There have been discussions with various developers to utilize existing water space or land to do that,” Galvin says. But, he adds, the nearby Port of Long Beach “has a much larger proposal to develop” as a logistics base to supply wind energy components.

“On our side, we’ve looked at different developers to see what can be done on land or water but nothing is solid at this point,” Galvin says. The port would be happy to play a role in offshore wind where it can but “these companies need large pieces of land, like 100+ acres for long-term lease, and we just don’t have 100 acres to be used for that. So that’s an issue we have.”

The Port of Long Beach’s Pier Wind project is a proposed 400-acre terminal designed to facilitate the assembly of offshore wind turbines, which would be towed to wind farms in the ocean off central and northern California. If approved, it would be the largest facility of its kind in the nation and would help California meet its goals for sustainability and renewable energy sources. 

Galvin concludes by saying, “The big goal here between the ports of L.A. and Long Beach is to get to zero emissions on our terminals by 2030 and off-terminal with our drayage truck fleet by 2035." – MarEx  

 

The Maritime Executives' ports columnist Tom Peters writes from Halifax, Nova Scotia. 

 

The opinions expressed herein are the author's and not necessarily those of The Maritime Executiv