As talks on infrastructure continue, Congress must invest in the workers who will build it

BY VERONICA GOODMAN, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR — 07/20/21

THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL

© Getty Images


As talks on a bipartisan infrastructure deal continue, it’s critical to our country’s ongoing economic recovery that workforce development funding – specifically the $100 billion set aside in the American Jobs Plan – not be sidelined. To ensure a labor market recovery for all American workers, including those who have been left behind in the past, we need to invest in employment opportunities for those who have struggled during the pandemic and those who face challenges, no matter the economic conditions.

Many signs point to a labor market in recovery. The current unemployment rate is 5.9 percent, down considerably from historic highs in 2020 but still above pre-pandemic levels. Last week, initial unemployment claims were at the lowest level since March 2020 — welcome progress thanks to the success of the administration’s American Rescue Plan and aggressive vaccination campaign.

But the recovery has remained uneven across education levels and for certain groups. The unemployment rate for Black, Hispanic and non-college educated workers follows past trends and is elevated compared to those with a Bachelor’s degree or higher. In June 2021, the unemployment rate for those with a high school degree and no college was double (7 percent) that of workers with a bachelor’s degree or higher (3.5 percent).


Long spells of unemployment and becoming disconnected from the labor market have profoundly negative effects on families’ overall economic security, including the children of those workers, and can stunt local economies. It is in everyone’s economic interest not just to provide opportunities for workers across the economic distribution but to ensure that our workforce development infrastructure prioritizes good outcomes. The pandemic recovery is an opportunity to make workforce development more inclusive.

Our experience with past downturns offers evidence-based strategies for how policymakers can strengthen the labor market for all workers and ensure a more equitable economic recovery.

The American Jobs Plan recognizes that subsidized employment programs are a proven strategy for helping workers, especially those who face structural obstacles, become connected quickly to quality jobs and career pathways. Programs like the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Emergency Fund used during the Great Recession by states to place more than 250,000 workers in various industries should be scaled and replicated going forward.

Another workforce program that could help the long-term unemployed is the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC), which creates an incentive for employers to hire individuals from certain groups who face persistent barriers to employment, such as veterans and those receiving public assistance benefits.

To help workers, Congress should also not let the best be the enemy of the good when it comes to the minimum wage. Most agree that workers deserve a raise from the current inadequate rate of $7.25, yet there are disagreements on the exact amount, and momentum has slowed for $15. Democrats should negotiate up as much as they can – be it to $11 or $12 per hour – since any increase would be an improvement for low-income workers and peg ongoing increases to inflation. We can also ensure that minimum wage workers earn enough to move into the middle class by instituting a Living Wage Credit, which would absorb the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and provide more generous tax relief for individuals making less than $40,000 per year, phased out beyond that income threshold.

There is still economic uncertainty from factors (including the Delta variant) that threaten our nascent recovery. Reforming unemployment insurance (UI) and making it function as an “automatic stabilizer,” triggered as soon as the economy enters a downturn, would help get aid to unemployed workers faster in a crisis. Our UI systems need to be modernized entirely, and Congress should consider updates, such as offering extended benefits for more weeks during severe recessions, adequately funding updates to state IT systems and covering more jobseekers, such as the self-employed.

Other important elements of the American Families Plan must also be included and will provide additional supports for working families, along with a permanent expansion of the Child Tax Credit. The White House has also signaled that competition across the economy will strengthen the bargaining power of workers by targeting non-compete agreements and monopsonistic labor markets, which have led to wage stagnation and income inequality.

These are all essential steps, but as Congress and the Biden administration work on the next infrastructure package, we cannot leave out investments in the workers who will build it. The $100 billion set aside in the American Jobs Plan, along with additional supports for workers, will all be important to support a healthy recovery that is equitable and long lasting.

Veronica Goodman is director of social policy at the Progressive Policy Institute.

Will the Democrats’ Climate Legislation Hinge on Carbon Capture?

The bipartisan infrastructure bill may include billions in support for the

 technology. 

Progressive groups are not happy about it.

By Nicholas Kusnetz
July 20, 2021

Equipment installed as part of the Petra Nova Carbon Capture Project stands at the NRG Energy Inc. WA Parish generating station in Thompsons, Texas, on Thursday, Feb. 16, 2017. The project later shut down operations indefinitely. 

Credit: Luke Sharrett/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The Democrats’ fragile package of sweeping climate and infrastructure legislation might end up being held together by a technology known as carbon capture and storage. That is, if it doesn’t pull it apart.

The Senate is expected to vote Wednesday on a bipartisan infrastructure bill that includes billions in government support for carbon capture, which pulls carbon dioxide out of smokestack emissions or straight from the air and pumps it underground. But on Monday, a coalition of hundreds of progressive environmental groups sent an open letter to President Joe Biden and Democratic Congressional leaders calling on them to reject the technology.

“Carbon capture is not a climate solution,” the groups wrote in the letter, which was accompanied by an advertisement in the Washington Post. “To the contrary, investing in carbon capture delays the needed transition away from fossil fuels and other combustible energy sources, and poses significant new environmental, health, and safety risks, particularly to Black, Brown, and Indigenous communities already overburdened by industrial pollution, dispossession, and the impacts of climate change.”

The letter reflects a split that has emerged in the advocacy community and among Democrats. Many of the nation’s most influential, mainstream environmental groups did not sign the letter, while those organizations that did sign included more left-leaning, justice-focused and local groups.

Carbon capture and storage, or CCS, has taken on an increasingly central role in climate policy discussions over the last couple of years. It is one of the few climate actions that draws bipartisan support. Most major labor unions also support CCS, arguing that its deployment could provide new jobs and help extend the life of some gas or coal-burning power plants, which often provide high-paying union jobs. And the fossil fuel industries have promoted the technology for decades.

Some environmental groups have also thrown their support behind carbon capture technology, arguing that it could prove critical to meeting ambitious climate goals. Global emissions have continued to rise, they note, and the world is already experiencing dangerous impacts of warming like the heat waves, fires and floods that hit North America and Europe in recent weeks. In particular, these organizations say, CCS could be attached to industrial sources like steel and cement manufacturing, which do not currently have good emissions-free alternatives, and might allow carbon dioxide to be pulled straight from the air to help bring atmospheric concentrations back to safer levels.

But some progressive groups, and many that are focused on environmental justice, have opposed carbon capture, saying that it only serves to extend the life of fossil fuels when those fuels should instead be phased out as rapidly as possible.

“If the argument is, we should not stop burning fossil fuels, we’re finished with the conversation,” said Natalie Mebane, policy director for 350.org, which was among the groups that signed the letter. “Because we are going to stop burning fossil fuels.”

As with so many national policy discussions this year, much may revolve around Sen. Joe Manchin, the West Virginia Democrat who is a moderate, a long-time supporter of the fossil fuel industry and chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

Last week, that committee approved legislation that will serve as language for the energy sections of a larger infrastructure package. The bill includes billions of dollars to support CCS, including measures that aim to finance and speed development of infrastructure to transport carbon dioxide from industrial capture sites to underground storage locations and money for producing hydrogen from natural gas with carbon capture technology.

“That’s a huge first,” said Brad Crabtree, who runs the Carbon Capture Coalition, which includes companies from the coal, oil and other industrial sectors, as well as unions and some environmental groups. “It would be a policy of global significance if it is adopted.”

The carbon capture provisions could prove critical to maintaining Manchin’s support for a separate, more expansive budget deal that would address climate change and other issues, and would require the support of all 50 Senate Democrats to pass. Climate advocates have been pushing for that deal to include a clean electricity standard that would require utilities to move to carbon-free sources of energy, and a major question has been what types of energy could count as “clean.” Last week, Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) issued a statement saying her proposed clean electricity standard, which counts fossil fuel plants with CCS as clean, had made it into the agreement.

A spokeswoman for Smith declined to comment further.

A Climate Tax Credit for Big Oil

Energy companies have been lobbying for increased government support for carbon capture and storage. In June, Greenpeace UK released an interview it had conducted undercover with an ExxonMobil lobbyist, Keith McCoy, who identified the technology as one of the company’s top lobbying priorities. McCoy, who believed he was speaking with a recruiter looking to hire a lobbyist, said Exxon was seeking support for the technology in the bipartisan infrastructure package.

“We’re entering into the carbon capture space, so now we’re talking about how do we get the government to support some of our activities,” McCoy said, according to a transcript of the interview provided to Inside Climate News.

McCoy identified a tax credit known as 45Q, which can be claimed by companies that capture carbon dioxide from their operations, as a key component of that government support.

Lawmakers have introduced several bills this year that would extend and increase the value of that tax credit, and Crabtree said his group hopes to see elements of those bills included in the Democrats’ budget deal.

As Inside Climate News reported last year, Exxon has probably benefited more than any other company from the tax credit, and may have received hundreds of millions of dollars in tax benefits from it over the last decade, according to estimates based on public records. While the IRS said last year that $1 billion had been claimed under the credit, it does not disclose which companies have claimed the credit or how much any individual company has received.

Some advocates have pointed to Exxon’s use of the tax credit to argue that carbon capture and storage is an example of how the fossil fuel industry has manipulated policy in its favor. One of the only current markets for captured carbon dioxide is the oil industry, which injects the gas into depleted oil wells to squeeze more petroleum from the ground. Under the tax credit, companies are allowed to claim it even if they sell the CO2 for this use, and that is exactly what Exxon does with the carbon dioxide captured from its natural gas processing plant in Wyoming.

“How in the world is that a climate-related tax credit?” Mebane said. The letter sent to Biden and the Democratic leaders by the progressive groups calls for lawmakers to prohibit the use of the tax credit when carbon dioxide is used for oil production. The letter was also signed by some Canadian environmental groups and sent to leaders in that country, where the oil industry is pursuing plans to build carbon capture plants.

A spokesman for Exxon declined to comment.

As oil companies have come under pressure from investors and advocates to transition their businesses, many have turned more attention to CCS. In April, Exxon announced a proposal to create a CCS “hub” in Houston, where industrial plants would be fitted with the technology and linked together with pipelines to carry the gas to underground storage sites. The company said the effort could cost $100 billion, and would need government support.

The proposal highlighted another concern of some environmental groups: Even if such a CCS hub was able to eliminate all the carbon dioxide from industrial sources, it might do little about the toxic pollution emitted by the refineries, petrochemical plants and other sources that have burdened environmental justice communities with unhealthy air.

Crabtree said that because the government will play a role in financing and supporting its development, policymakers could require that carbon capture deployment be paired with other technologies to address these harmful pollutants, too. And he pointed to the technology’s bipartisan support as evidence that it ought to be part of any climate bill.

“It’s not an either or proposition here,” he said. “It has to be an ‘and.’”

Related

A Lifeline for a Coal Plant Gives Hope to a North Dakota Town. Others See It as a Boondoggle


For a Climate-Concerned President and a Hostile Senate, One Technology May Provide Common Ground


Exxon Touts Carbon Capture as a Climate Fix, but Uses It to Maximize Profit and Keep Oil Flowing

Nicholas Kusnetz
Reporter, New York City
Nicholas Kusnetz is a reporter for Inside Climate News. Before joining ICN, he worked at the Center for Public Integrity and ProPublica. His work has won numerous awards, including from the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Society of American Business Editors and Writers, and has appeared in more than a dozen publications, including The Washington Post, Businessweek, The Nation, Fast Company and The New York Times. You can reach Nicholas at nicholas.kusnetz@insideclimatenews.org and securely at nicholas.kusnetz@protonmail.com.

BIG OIL SHILL

Carbon Capture: The Key Answer on Climate Change


By Dan Ervin
July 18, 2021

REAL CLEAR CLIMATE

Hard as it may be for many environmentalists to acknowledge, a technology that captures carbon dioxide emissions at coal plants needs to be a part of a global approach to carbon dioxide reduction.

It is a remarkable paradox: At a time when the rest of the world is looking toward America for leadership in combating global warming, the environmental movement refuses to accept the only technology that could make a real difference in reducing carbon emissions from coal and other fossil fuels that are the foundation of the global energy system. Coal plants with carbon capture technology along with advanced nuclear reactors can reliably provide all of the electricity needed globally with little or no CO2 emissions. These technologies will work in almost any region in the world.


Those politicians and environmentalists who claim that coal is a relic of the past ignore its importance in this country and abroad. Coal is the world’s leading fuel for electricity generation, providing nearly 40% of the world's electricity supply, and an even higher percentage in countries with fast-growing economies. For example, China last year added 40 GW of new coal-fired power capacity, more than four times the amount of coal capacity that was retired in the U.S. in 2020.

The U.S. cannot lead on climate by writing off coal or other fossil fuels. As Senator Joe Manchin recently said, “you cannot eliminate your way to a cleaner climate, you can innovate your way, but not eliminate your way.”

It’s absolutely critical that U.S. energy policy recognizes that American climate leadership will come directly from coal country and advanced fossil fuel technologies along with innovative nuclear reactor designs. Unfortunately, Greens who claim to care the most about reducing emissions seem far more determined to boost wind and solar power than they do about producing replicable climate solutions that work both in the U.S. and abroad. The environmentalists are aided by financiers that earn enormous fees from financing solar and wind projects. Despite generous subsidies and mandates for renewable energy, solar and wind power combined provide 10.7% of U.S. electricity in 2020. Globally, they supply even less – 7% of power.

While wind and solar are growing, we must recognize that they are unreliable. A recent Texas heat wave – which is common – prompted the local grid operator to ask Texans to conserve electricity. A quick search of the Energy Information Administration’s data provides an explanation, wind generation was approximately a third of expectations. Coal and nuclear production remained constant and natural gas generation increased by approximately 25 percent. This is a clear illustration of the need for reliable generation by fossil fuels and nuclear plants.


Fatih Birol, director of the International Energy Agency, has called carbon capture -- not wind or solar generation -- the "most vital" technology being developed to reduce emissions. He and other energy experts understand that fossil fuels will remain mainstays of the global economy for decades to come.

Using these fuels with cost-effective technologies to capture and utilize their emissions is just the kind of innovative, advanced energy system both the U.S. and the world need. The challenge now is to make carbon capture a key part of a portfolio of solutions to decrease emissions.

Growing concern about climate change is an opportunity for a reality check in the debate over how to slow the rise in greenhouse gas emissions. It brings into sharp focus the most pressing challenge: Can it be done fast enough, cheaply enough and on a sufficient scale without carbon capture? The answer is simply no.

President Biden has said we must double down on federal investments and enhance tax incentives for carbon capture. He’s absolutely right and West Virginia should become a hub for development and the deployment of the technologies the world needs.

There is simply no credible way to address the climate challenge without becoming more practical about the way we generate electricity and the need for carbon capture. This shouldn't be a secondary piece of the solution to reduce global emissions but rather right at the heart of the effort.

Dan Ervin, PhD, is a Professor of Finance in the Perdue School of Business at Salisbury University.

OIL LOBBY REPORT

Oil and gas were core of Wyoming economy before pandemic, industry report finds


The sun sets behind an oil pump outside the town of Glenrock on October 14. A report by the American Petroleum Institute found that 26.3% of Wyoming's 2019 GPD was contributed to directly or indirectly, or induced, by the oil and gas industry.

Cayla Nimmo, Star-Tribune


Before the mass layoffs of 2020, one-sixth of Wyoming’s jobs and more than a quarter of its GDP came from the oil and gas industry.

A report released Tuesday by the American Petroleum Institute found that in 2019, the industry directly supported 28,270 jobs — 6.8% of the state’s total employment. It generated 18% of Wyoming’s GDP and 17.3% of its labor income, including wages, salaries, benefits and proprietors' income.

Through indirect impacts, which occur along the supply chain, and induced impacts, which come from the spending of industry-related earnings, oil and gas supported another 9.8% of jobs, 8.3% of GDP and 8.3% of labor income in the state.

Nationally, the industry impacted 5.6% of U.S. jobs, 7.9% of GDP and 6.8% of labor income, according to the report.

“Stepping back from those specific numbers, I think what this study tells us is that the oil and natural gas industry will be essential in the post-pandemic recovery,” said Frank Macchiarola, API’s senior vice president of policy, economics and regulatory affairs. “Not just in creating good paying jobs and economic growth, but also in providing for low-cost energy for the American people.”

Wyoming was especially vulnerable to the fuel demand crash caused by COVID-19. In 2019, it had the second-highest share of residents whose employment was impacted significantly by the oil and gas sector — 16.6%, behind Oklahoma’s 16.7% — and the highest proportion of labor income from the industry.

In total, 26.3% of Wyoming’s 2019 GDP was contributed to directly or indirectly, or induced, by the oil and gas industry — the fourth-highest percentage after Alaska, Louisiana and Oklahoma. And the state’s tax structure is structured around resource extraction.

“If you aggregate all of the tax revenue from oil and gas in 2019, it was $1.67 billion,” said Pete Obermueller, president of the Petroleum Association of Wyoming. “The annual general fund budget in Wyoming is about $3 billion. So one industry sector basically pays for half or more of the state's general fund.”

Over the last decade, U.S. natural gas production increased by about 60%, while oil production doubled, Macchiarola said. Despite the push by the federal government and a growing number of states to transition to electric vehicles and renewable energy sources, demand for oil is expected to continue rising through 2030, concluded a new report by researchers from Columbia University and the University of California, Davis.

But in 2019, Wyoming saw combined oil and gas production of 369,434,845 barrels of oil equivalent, according to the petroleum association — a 22.4% decline from its 2009 total of 475,782,140 barrels of oil equivalent.

And though, nationally, the oil and gas industry is rapidly nearing 2019 production levels as it recovers from its 2020 slump, Wyoming’s recovery has lagged behind other states.

Obermueller says the Biden administration’s restrictions on leases for new drilling — an executive order, intended to address climate change, that was struck down by a federal judge last month — has had a disproportionate effect on Wyoming.

“The biggest hurdle is that we are highly, highly dependent upon federal government rules and regulations and law, because there's hardly any hydrocarbons produced in Wyoming that’s not from federal lands or federal minerals,” Obermueller said. “So if you take the universities at their word that we have not reached peak demand, but we have federal policies that do not allow Wyoming to play in the space, that demand is going to be met by Texas, and North Dakota, and China, and Saudi Arabia and other places.”

How Big Oil keeps a grip on New Mexico – with the help of a major lobbyist

Records show the firm FTI and its fossil fuel clients benefit from local government ties

Cody Nelson for Floodlight and Adrian Hedden for the Carlsbad Current-Argus
This story is a collaboration with Floodlight and the Guardian.

JULY 20,2021

When Joe Biden paused oil and gas drilling leases on federal lands earlier this year, the alarm bells rang in southeastern New Mexico.

Officials in Eddy County – which, along with neighboring Lea County, holds New Mexico’s share of the oil- and gas-rich Permian Basin – immediately worried about potential economic fallout.

“This news is exceptionally disappointing,” county manager Allen Davis wrote in an email to colleagues. “The message couldn’t be more clear: southeast New Mexico is not a business friendly for an industry that has sustained the state of New Mexico finances for decades [sic].”

Situated in the Chihuahuan desert of New Mexico’s staunchly Republican southeast region, Eddy County is a rural, industrial area, where the top employers are in the mining and oil and gas industries. And county leaders appeared to be depending on their influential allies, including the international lobbying firm FTI Consulting, to keep it that way.

Carlsbad and Eddy County paid $50,000 for consulting firm services

FTI, best known for consulting large corporations, has previously worked on behalf of major oil and gas companies like ExxonMobil, Chevron and Cimarex.

But for the past several years, it has also had lobbying contracts with much smaller clients: Eddy County and the City of Carlsbad, the county seat.

Emails, contracts and other records obtained by Floodlight and the watchdog organization Documented show how FTI has used its footholds in Carlsbad and Eddy County for years to help push pro fossil-fuel messaging and policy. At the same time, FTI has been able to give its energy company clients easy access to local officials. The firm and one of its spinoffs are not registered as lobbyists with the state.


In the first quarter of this year alone, Carlsbad and Eddy County together paid at least $50,000 for FTI’s influence services. These publicly funded lobbying efforts have helped to maintain the fossil fuel industry’s stronghold in New Mexico – a state where Indigenous communities have criticized previous oil and gas policies as environmental racism because of the long-term impact on their health and land.

FTI has a reputation across the U.S. for running influence campaigns that give the impression they were started by local concerned citizens, despite being funded by big oil, a practice known as astroturfing. The New York Times reported that FTI staffers help run an organization called New Mexicans for Economic Prosperity, a coalition of business associations and other partners. Among them is the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association, which advocates for “responsible development” in the state, per the group’s website.

How FTI Consulting works for New Mexico officials

While it’s unclear exactly what FTI’s lobbying has achieved in southeast New Mexico, the firm has close ties to the extractive industries, and its relationship with the small localities of Carlsbad and Eddy County is unusual, especially for a company of FTI’s size.

For Carlsbad and Eddy County, contracting with FTI was one way of trying to maintain the drilling status quo.

One way FTI has used its influence on behalf of New Mexican county officials is by helping wrangle press. When Eddy leaders needed help pushing back against Biden’s drilling order earlier this year, they got in touch with Jeff Murray, a former Democratic congressional staffer and a high-powered lobbyist working with FTI Consulting.

Murray offered to help them get “friendly press”, including in the conservative Washington Examiner, adding that it would be “a good opportunity to get our story out to a wide audience,” according to an email obtained by Floodlight.

A few weeks later, the Examiner published a quote from Davis, the county manager, in which he criticized Democratic governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s response to the drilling lease moratorium: “When the oil and gas production from Eddy and [nearby] Lea counties provide 35% of her state’s general revenue money, you’d think she’d want to understand how the bread is going to be buttered.”

Soon after, the governor publicly said she was seeking a waiver to exempt New Mexico from the order, a move that environmentalists strongly opposed.

State representative Jim Townsend, a Republican from Artesia, New Mexico, said oil and gas “ought to work hand-in-hand” with local government officials.

“They (oil and gas industries) employ lots of New Mexicans, they pay lots of taxes and they have a big impact on our state. I’m a big proponent of getting employers at the table equitably and within reason,” he said. “Most of those jobs are high-paying, career-based jobs. They deserve a significant seat at the table.”

Carlsbad’s mayor, Dale Janway, defended the city’s work with FTI and said the primary reason for its contract with the firm was to consult on nuclear energy waste regulations issues at the federal level. He said the oil and gas industry keeps Carlsbad’s economy thriving.


“Given the thousands of local residents who work in the oil and gas industry, there’s clearly going to be a correlation between supporting this industry and supporting our community,” Janway said. “Our governing body is always going to do what we feel is best for Carlsbad and its citizens.”
Drilling brings money, but critics point to climate change and health concerns

Big oil’s presence has long been felt in the southeastern corner of New Mexico, where Eddy County sits.

The extractive industry took hold in the formerly humble ranching community first for the mineral potash and later for oil and gas – overwhelming roadways with truck traffic and making housing less affordable as transient workers moved into apartments, RV parks and hotels.

The area is home to the Carlsbad Caverns national park and the Guadalupe Mountains national park, major tourist sites that could be threatened by pump jacks and pipelines. Along the Pecos River, wildlife could be threatened by expanded industrial activity, including the endangered Texas hornshell mussel.

Critics say a tight relationship among government officials and the fossil fuel industry, facilitated by an aggressive lobbying firm, is not in the best interest of Carlsbad residents.

Nicole Ghio, senior fossil fuels program manager at Friends of the Earth, said funneling local tax dollars to oil lobbying firms derails needed reforms for the people of Carlsbad and Eddy County.

“For far too long, front-line communities have dealt with the irresponsible boom-bust cycle of fossil fuel development while being saddled with clean-up costs, exposed to toxic pollution, and the reality of climate change,” Ghio said.


Oil and gas drilling, which has boomed in Eddy County and is only expected to grow, is a major driver for ozone and other kinds of air pollution that cause health problems and are driving the climate crisis.

Air quality in Eddy County is among the worst in the nation, according to the American Lung Association, which gave it an F grade for ozone pollution – which can cause myriad health problems from chest pain to reduced lung function.

Rather than moving away from these industries, Eddy County officials are doubling down. After all, the local government – like the rest of New Mexico – relies on tax revenues from drilling. Oil and gas taxes were expected to contribute more than $30 million to Eddy County in fiscal year 2021.

The industry often touts its contributions to the state budget, especially for public school funding, which in fiscal year 2020 totaled over $1 billion. However, the state’s public services – including its schools – are ranked among the nation’s worst.
Ghostwriting and unregistered lobbying

Late last year, when both presidential candidates were debating how to handle oil and gas drilling leases on federal lands, FTI’s Jeff Murray stepped in to help local leaders in the southeastern New Mexico region craft their response.

He wrote a letter to Joe Biden and Donald Trump that extolled the virtues of oil and gas drilling in New Mexico. “Energy is one of the top industries in New Mexico, and more than half of oil production and nearly two-thirds of natural gas production takes place on federal lands in our state,” he wrote.

Murray then sent the letter to Eddy County officials, asking them to sign it. All five county commissioners as well as Davis, the county manager, signed, and a county letterhead was attached. FTI’s messaging was sent to the president and the future president under the banner of a county government

.

FTI has fostered relationships between local New Mexico officials and leaders of some of its large energy clients. For example, in 2019 Murray organized a trip to Washington DC for the former Eddy County manager as well as current County Commissioner Ernie Carlson. On the agenda were meetings with officials for Cimarex and Chevron – both of which have been FTI clients and drillers in Eddy County.

In addition to its work on the federal level, FTI has lobbied New Mexico state officials, including Democratic House speaker Brian Egolf. FTI representatives met with Egolf numerous times in recent years and even threw him a private campaign fundraiser, according to documents obtained by Floodlight and Documented. FTI’s Murray made a $1,500 in-kind donation to Egolf’s PAC.

However, neither FTI nor Jeff Murray are registered as lobbyists in the state’s database. Murray did not respond to a request for comment for this article.

Delaney Marsco, senior legal counsel for ethics at Campaign Legal Center, said the public has a right to know when special interests are paying to influence public officials.

“FTI is a sophisticated actor. If it’s evading lobbying registration requirements in New Mexico, which appears to be the case here, that’s a big problem – it means the public is being kept in the dark about FTI’s influence efforts,” Marsco said.

Murray left FTI in February to start his own firm, 535 Group LLC. Records show that 535 Group isn’t a registered lobbyist in New Mexico, either, though it had a $10,000 contract with Carlsbad and a smaller one with Eddy in 2021. Murray’s work in New Mexico appears to be the same in scope as when he was an FTI employee; the firm contracts with 535 still.

Despite the health and climate risks to reliance on a fossil fuel economy, officials in southeast New Mexico continue to push drilling. Davis, a top public official in the county, defended FTI’s pro- oil and gas lobbying in an email.

SEE

FTI "friendly press" email - DocumentCloud

He wrote that there “is a lack of understanding about the business and fundamental economic drivers” that will be necessary to transition away from fossil fuels.

But Kayley Shoup, a Carlsbad-based organizer with the environmental group Citizens Caring for the Future, said local leaders are pushing a false narrative.

It “keeps our local community from having a seat at the table when it comes to this long economic transition that our country is and will be undergoing,” Shoup said.

'Eye of fire,' Exxon lobbyist's comments fuel renewed attacks on oil industry

BY RACHEL FRAZIN - 07/07/21

Environmentalists are ramping up their criticism of the oil and gas industry following revelations last week from an Exxon Mobil lobbyist on climate change and a viral "eye of fire" video from the Gulf of Mexico caused by a pipeline leak.

Progressives on Capitol Hill seized on the two events by pushing for robust climate provisions in forthcoming infrastructure legislation and renewing threats to haul company executives before Congress to testify.

Longtime congressional critics of the industry argued that the past week underscores the need to transition away from fossil fuels to mitigate climate change.


“Any reasonable person would look at the events of the past week—the ocean on fire and the fossil fuel industry actively complicit in the continuing climate crisis—and realize we need to pass the biggest, boldest climate infrastructure package possible,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), sponsor of the Green New Deal in the Senate, told The Hill in a statement.

Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, said that the events give “more power” to climate legislation and efforts to restrict drilling on public land and waters.

“It gives more power to those pieces of legislation because it’s a way to rein this in and it’s a way to indicate from this administration or from this Congress that that’s not going to be tolerated,” he said in an interview.

The firestorm started last week when an undercover activist group released a recording of Exxon lobbyist Keith McCoy discussing how the company has fought “against some of the science,” adding that Exxon’s support for a carbon tax was just a talking point. He also said he has sought to influence the infrastructure debate in Washington.

A few days later, a viral video showed a ring of fire in the Gulf of Mexico caused by a gas leak from an underwater pipeline belonging to Mexican state-owned oil company Pemex.

The two events come as Congress prepares to move forward on a bipartisan infrastructure proposal as some Democratic senators dig in on their demands for significant climate provisions.


In the Senate, this has led to something of a two-track system, where a bipartisan measure will be complemented by a likely Democrat-only package that will sidestep a GOP filibuster through the budget reconciliation process and carry a higher price tag.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a former co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said that while he wouldn’t draw any red lines, he’d like to see an infrastructure bill that gets rid of fossil fuel subsidies but includes investment in electric vehicles, clean energy tax credits and a requirement that power providers obtain a certain amount of their energy from renewable sources.

He said in an interview that the news of the past week “reinforces the view that there has to be climate legislation for an infrastructure deal.”

Khanna, chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Environment, has for weeks discussed the possibility of subpoenaing major energy companies after executives declined to appear at recent hearings.

“Last week’s events crystallize the opinion of Democratic leaders that fossil fuel executives need to come into Congress to testify,” he told The Hill, saying he might try to seek testimony from leaders at Chevron, Peabody Energy and Shell.

“They will come in to testify to the Oversight Committee,” he said of industry in general. “I will do everything in my power ... to make sure that happens.”

Asked whether subpoenas were possible, he said, “that decision is the committee’s but let me just say everything has been discussed, everything is on the table and we will make sure they show up.”

Grijalva, too, said he would speak with Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.), who leads the Natural Resources Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, about possibly compelling the companies to testify.

Lindsay Reilly, a spokesperson for Porter, said the lawmaker “is determined to get answers from the oil and gas industry on behalf of the American people, and she is open to all options, including subpoenas, to get those answers.”

Frank Maisano, senior principal at Bracewell LLP’s policy resolution group, which represents various energy companies, dismissed the idea that the Exxon and Gulf of Mexico incidents will make much of a difference on Capitol Hill, adding that they were being used by activists to “try to jam their agenda at you.”

“The fact that all of these things are happening at once gives them the ability to have a talking point,” Maisano said.

He also characterized the subpoena threats as “political grandstanding.”

After the tapes of the lobbyist's remarks were published, Exxon Mobil CEO Darren Woods attempted to distance the company.

“Comments made by the individuals in no way represent the company’s position on a variety of issues, including climate policy and our firm commitment that carbon pricing is important to addressing climate change. The individuals interviewed were never involved in developing the company’s policy positions on the issues discussed,” Woods said in a statement last week.

Pemex, meanwhile, blamed the Gulf of Mexico fire on a gas leak, but said there was no oil spill and that the fire was extinguished after about five hours.

Oil industry: Shareholders revolt for climate action

Powerful investors are demanding climate action from oil and gas giants for the sake of their bottom lines as well as the planet.


Oil industry giants like Exxon and Shell are coming under increasing pressure to adopt energy transition measures


It was an earthquake for the oil industry and its financiers.

Shareholders of ExxonMobil, the world's second largest oil and gas giant, elected three candidates from the hedge fund Engine No. 1 to the company's 12-member board of directors in a crucial vote at the end of May.

The fund holds just 0.02% of the shares in ExxonMobil and had campaigned to accelerate the group's transition from polluting fossil fuels to clean energy. In doing so, it hoped to secure Exxon's profitability in the long term.

"Shareholders have spoken and the message is clear. It's time for board accountability," said Anne Simpson of Californian pension fund CalPERS. "We need climate competent directors willing and able to drive the energy transition."

The three largest pension funds in the US — CalPERs, the Californian Teachers' Pension Fund CalSTR and the New York State Common — supported the initiative, as did Black Rock, the world's largest asset manager and Exxon's second largest shareholder. "The votes at Exxon mark a new era in financial markets, with investors behaving like owners," said Simpson.

Companies without a climate strategy need to change, CalSTR said in a statement to DW. "Shareholders have the power to effect change at even the most resistant companies... to contribute to the sustainable value of their investments. "

Chevron is among a number of big oil and gas companies whose shareholders are pushing it to pollute less

The power of shareholders in large corporations

Other corporations have also felt the pressure from so-called impact investors, who advocate for a more sustainable corporate strategy. At the end of May, 61% of the shareholders of US oil giant Chevron also voted in favor of drastically reducing the company's emissions. Although the vote is not binding, it was a clear signal to the company's management that shareholders are increasingly demanding climate protection.

Last year, the French oil company Total set itself a zero-emissions target by 2050. This came after negotiations with investors who demanded a significant change in direction — with success. The initiators are part of ClimateAction100+, a network of over 500 investors responsible for $54 trillion (€45 trillion) in assets. They are pushing to bring emissions in large corporations in line with the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement to limit warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures.

Following pressure from lobby groups, companies like BASF, Shell, General Electric, Eni, BP and Occidental Petroleum have also announced steps towards emissions cuts.

"Every large oil and gas company will need to adapt to the global energy transition — this is an unavoidable reality, even though not all management teams currently realize that fact," said Pavel Molchanov, financial analyst at consulting firm Raymond James. "That means investing less in oil and gas production, and more in low-carbon energy."

But as recently as October, Exxon CEO Daren Woods had rejected the claim that climate change poses a long-term risk to the industry. The company issued a public apology last Thursday after one of its senior lobbyists was caught in a Greenpeace sting operation admitting that Exxon worked with shadow groups against climate action and only supported a carbon tax because they did not think it politically viable.

Fossil fuel companies have volatile share prices

Oil, gas and coal could soon be burning money

It's not just about the climate.

If investors are to share in profits through dividends, a company must first generate profits. But Exxon, for example, made losses of $22 billion last year. Engine No. 1's campaign focused on how the company can stay profitable by moving away from fossil fuels.

"This isn't a climate organization, this is a hedge fund driven by financial returns," said Mike Coffin, financial analyst of the London-based financial think tank Carbon Tracker. But although the financial risk of investing in oil, gas and coal is constantly growing, hundreds of billions of dollars continue to be invested annually in fossil fuel projects.

The upheavals of recent years are just the beginning, said Coffin. "The energy transition is only accelerating. It's very hard to predict what will happen over the coming years. And that's where the risk comes."

Even if drastic measures are taken today, investments of $10 trillion in the oil, gas and building sectors risk becoming "stranded assets," investments that generate losses instead of profits. About 2% of global GDP, as of 2015, would be effectively burned as a result.

Extinction Rebellion protestors are calling for an end to oil exploration and demanding governments and banks stop financing fossil fuel projects

Exxon coup also possible in Europe?

Still, a vote like the one at Exxon in the US would hardly be conceivable in Europe today, said Guillaume Prache, managing director of Better Finance, the interest group representing European shareholders.

On the one hand, this is because many investors are withdrawing their capital from climate-damaging companies instead of working to change them. As a result, investors who are less concerned about sustainability goals buy into these companies cheaply, thus losing the influence of critical investors, said Prache. "What will happen when their majority is owned by Chinese or Middle Eastern treasures? You think that are huge cash flows will be put to accelerate the energy transition? I'm really not sure about that."

What's more, it's much more difficult for private investors in the EU to get involved in the running of a company, for instance by drafting resolutions, said Prache. These procedures would have to become simpler and more digital. "Give the small investors the power to exercise their votes... and you will see things happening like what happened at Exxon."

Since 2016 companies have been drilling for oil even in the Arctic

For now, wind turbines are not replacing oil

The restructuring of global corporations takes years or even decades. In the case of Exxon, some observers doubt how serious the hedge fund Engine No. 1 is about sustainability — and whether they really live up to the title of "activist investors."

One of the new board members, Alexander Karsner, is a top manager at Google, while his colleague on the board Gregory Goff earned money in the oil and gas industry for decades. Writing in a blog post, stock market analyst Paul Sankey said: "Anyone who thinks that Greg Goff is going to storm into the Exxon Mobil boardroom and start yelling about wind farms does not know Greg Goff... We know Greg Goff, this will be orderly."

Goff would be more concerned with whipping the group into shape rather than achieving net zero, Sankey said. But the former no longer excludes the latter.

This article was translated from German.

DW

500 organizations in Canada, U.S. urge feds to stop investing in carbon capture technology

By Cloe Logan | News | July 20th 2021

NATIONAL OBSERVER

The signatories say carbon capture investment will only lead to more fossil fuel extraction. Photo by Harrison Haines/Pexels

Investment in carbon capture technology will hinder Canada’s transition away from fossil fuels and exacerbate the effects of climate change, says a new letter co-signed by hundreds of organizations.

Over 500 environmental groups and other organizations from Canada and the U.S. put the piece together, which ran as a full-page ad in the Washington Post and Ottawa’s Hill Times. It expresses their concern with government investment in carbon capture and the green guise associated with it.

Carbon capture, which stores emissions from coal and gas production as well as plastics manufacturing, transports CO2 to other locations, where it’s either stored underground or used for “industrial processes,” according to the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), one of the signatories on the letter.
miss out

The groups say most carbon capture helps the fossil fuel industry — the letter explains that almost 80 per cent of carbon capture funds more oil extraction.

Some experts have said the technology is better than nothing, but many share the same concerns as environmental groups. Proponents of carbon capture and storage argue it is crucial for helping heavy industry decarbonize, but critics say most carbon capture actually helps the fossil fuel industry by prolonging the use of oil and gas.

In Budget 2021, the federal government outlined a new tax credit for carbon capture-based projects, which will be available come 2022. The budget outlined a total of $319 million to be spent over seven years on “research, development, and demonstrations” of carbon-capture technology.

Just earlier this month, Ottawa put forward $25 million for a carbon capture project in British Columbia, which it says will capture 2,000 tonnes of CO2 per day. The CEO of Svante Inc, the Burnaby company behind the project, called Vancouver the “Silicon Valley of carbon-capture technology development.”

Provinces are also active in carbon capture funds: British Columbia has a program that allows companies to sell carbon offsets to the province, the government of Saskatchewan partnered with the federal government to help fund the Boundary Dam’s coal carbon-capture project, and the province of Alberta has also put money towards CO2 projects, such as the $745 million it put towards the Shell Quest Carbon Capture and Storage Project.

The U.S. government has a similar tax credit, legislation passed in 2008, which gives money to companies who capture carbon. Gas giant Exxon currently has one of the world’s largest carbon capture plants in Wyoming, for which it’s set to receive $70 million in subsidies if the project goes according to plan — money that will likely go into funding more oil and gas extraction.

However, fixing fossil fuels isn’t possible, says Julia Levin, senior climate and energy program manager for Environmental Defence, one of the organizations that co-signed the letter. She calls carbon capture a “Trojan horse” that oil and gas companies can use to continue fossil fuel production, an opportunity to expand the industry that created the climate emergency.

“The government of Canada should not use any kind of financial support or tax incentive to prop up false climate solutions that only serve to delay the necessary transition off of fossil fuels,” she said.

Investment in carbon capture technology will hinder Canada’s transition away from fossil fuels, says a new letter co-signed by hundreds of organizations. #CarbonCapture

“Instead, we should be focused on real climate solutions including renewable energy and energy efficiency that are job-creating, safe, affordable and ready to be deployed.”


Not only does funding toward the technology hurt the environment, it affects the possibility of a just transition for fossil fuel workers and perpetuates health and environmental risks that disproportionately affect Black, Brown and Indigenous communities, says the Indigenous Environmental Network (IEN), a U.S.-based organization that also co-signed the letter.

“Oil, coal and gas will use these funds to build out more pipelines and concentrate fossil fuel pollution on already impacted Indigenous nations and environmental justice communities,” said Tom Goldtooth, executive director of IEN.

“Billions of dollars for carbon capture essentially redirects money away from renewable energy like solar and wind. We do not have time and money to waste on more questionable carbon capture infrastructure.”


July 20th 2021


Cloe Logan
Reporter
@CloeILogan

Keep reading


Alberta is gambling its future on carbon capture
By John Woodside | News, Business, Energy, Ottawa Insider | June 11th 2021

Will Trudeau’s wager on carbon capture help or hurt the environment?
By Carl Meyer | News, Energy, Politics, Ottawa Insider | April 21st 2021Climate Change

Budget 2021 targets cleantech, funding for carbon capture
By Carl Meyer | News, Energy, Politics, Ottawa Insider | April 19th 2021

‘A shocking failure’: Chevron criticised for missing carbon capture target at WA gas project


The Western Australian environment minister is seeking an explanation after the energy company fell short of its five-year target

The Chevron gas project under construction on Barrow Island off Western Australia in 2016. Chevron Australia is facing criticism for missing its five-year carbon capture and storage target. Photograph: Ray Strange/AAP

Adam Morton 

Climate and environment editor

THE GUARDIAN
Mon 19 Jul 2021 

The energy giant Chevron has conceded its self-described world’s biggest carbon capture and storage (CCS) project has failed to meet a five-year target for burying carbon dioxide under an island off Western Australia.

Climate campaigners believe the company should be heavily fined after it acknowledged on Monday that it had not met a requirement to capture and inject underground at least 80% of emissions from a gas reservoir over the first five years of the Gorgon liquefied natural gas (LNG) development

The Western Australian environment minister, Amber-Jade Sanderson, said through a spokesperson that she had called Chevron in for a meeting “to seek an explanation of how the company intends to address the issue”.

An analysis last year suggested Chevron could face a bill of more than A$100m if required to offset all emissions that breached its approval requirements.

Chevron Australia, which operates the Gorgon facility on behalf of partners including Shell and ExxonMobil, issued a statement saying it was “poised to reach a significant milestone” of injecting 5m tonnes of greenhouse gas more than 2km beneath Barrow Island since sequestration belatedly began in August 2019.


Gas and coal companies among recipients of $50m in Coalition grants from carbon capture fund

The company’s Australian boss Mark Hatfield said this showed the company was “deploying technology, innovation and skills to deliver cleaner energy and reduce our carbon footprint”.

“The road hasn’t always been smooth, but the challenges we’ve faced and overcome make it easier for those who aspire to reduce their emissions through CCS,” he said.

Hatfield said the company would work with the WA regulator on how to “make up the shortfall”, which he did not quantify. Chevron Australia would release a report on the issue later this year, he said.

Ian Porter, a former oil and gas industry executive who is chair of the advocacy group Sustainable Energy Now WA, said the report was likely to find the project had captured only 30% of what it was supposed to.

He said the report would be a “major test case for CCS technology”, which the Morrison government is backing as one of five priorities under what it calls a “technology, not taxes” approach to emissions reduction.

“It’s a shocking failure of one of the world’s largest engineering projects,” Porter said.

“Chevron needs to face significant fines and be forced to offset the more than six million tonnes of unauthorised legacy carbon dioxide releases.

“I sincerely hope CCS does work one day. Ultimately, we need it. But until that time, it is reckless and disingenuous for the industry to keep pretending that it can expand operations and reach net zero.”


Western Australia LNG plant faces calls to shut down until faulty carbon capture system is fixed

Angus Taylor, the federal energy and emissions reduction minister, last year referred to Gorgon as an example of CCS “already working”, describing it as “the biggest project in the world”.

The $3bn development, which received $60m in federal funding, has had a troubled history. It was initially delayed for more than three years due to technical setbacks and the CCS system stopped working properly earlier this year following a problem with a pressure management system.

Under its terms of approval, the development was expected to capture and bury about 4m tonnes a year to meet a target of sequestering 80% of reservoir gas across a rolling five year period.

An aerial view of terminal tanks at the northern end of Barrow Island, the site of Chevron’s gas project. Photograph: Bill Hatto/AAP

The company was not required to capture emissions released during LNG processing. It means a fully successful CCS facility would reduce total emissions from Gorgon by only about 40%.

Despite Chevron missing its target, the oil and gas industry lobby group said the company’s announcement showed the industry was “continuing to walk the walk when it comes to reducing emissions”.

Andrew McConville, the chief executive of the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association, said: “Chevron’s announcement is on top of all the work our industry is already doing to combat climate change.”

New LNG developments have led to a significant increase in national industrial emissions over the past decade. They have limited the benefits of reduced carbon pollution from Australia’s electricity generation thanks to more solar and wind energy.

Official data shows the Gorgon facility has twice breached its initial emissions limit under the safeguard mechanism, a federal government policy that was promised to cap industrial carbon pollution but has allowed continued increases.

When the scheme started in 2016-17, Gorgon’s annual emissions limit – known as a baseline – was 8.34m tonnes of CO2.

It released 9.02m tonnes in 2017-18 and 8.97m tonnes in 2018-19, the most recent year for which data is available. Rather than be penalised for the breaches, it was allowed to set a new baseline calculated across a three-year period.

Separate official data from the Clean Energy Regulator shows Chevron was responsible for more than 10.2m tonnes of CO2 in 2019-20, making it Australia’s eighth-biggest emitter.

 

Chevron’s Carbon Capture Struggle Shows Big Oil’s Climate Hurdle

Bloomberg

July 19, 2021

By Stephen Stapczynski (Bloomberg) —

The world’s biggest project to capture and store carbon dioxide isn’t working like it should, highlighting the challenges oil companies face in tackling their greenhouse gas emissions.

Chevron Corp.’s system at the $54 billion Gorgon liquefied natural gas export plant in Australia missed a local government target to inject captured carbon dioxide underground, the San Ramon, California-based company said Monday. That’s a setback for energy companies globally that have staked their net-zero futures on the technology, which has shown limited success to date.

While Chevron has sequestered almost 5 million tons of carbon dioxide since the capture project began in August 2019, that’s fallen short of a target to capture an average 80% of emissions in the first five years of the LNG facility’s operation.

“Chevron is working with the Western Australia regulator on making up the shortfall,” the company’s Australia Managing Director Mark Hatfield said in a statement.

The company has buried only 30% of about 15 million tons of CO2 generated since Gorgon began producing gas in March 2016, oil industry publication Boiling Cold reported Friday.

Oil and natural gas producers are counting on carbon capture, or CCS, to succeed as they come under greater scrutiny from investors and governments to lower emissions. To limit global warming, about 10,000 large CCS facilities need to be built over the next five decades, according to Royal Dutch Shell Plc. There were fewer than 50 in operation last year.

Shell and ExxonMobil Corp. each hold 25% of Gorgon LNG, while Chevron has just over 47%.

Gorgon’s multibillion-dollar CCS project has been beset with technical issues, including problems with its pressure management system, according to Boiling Cold.

Instead of venting the CO2 into the atmosphere, which is the industry norm, Chevron’s plant is designed to manage pollution that’s produced from the offshore fields that feed the LNG facility. As the gas is sent to be liquefied for export, the CO2 is pumped into a reservoir more than 2 kilometers (1.2 miles) underground.

Western Australia’s government insisted on the CCS facility as a condition for approving Gorgon, which is expected to run for four decades. The state’s regulator has requested details on why Chevron missed its target, and Western Australia’s Environment Minister Amber-Jade Sanderson is seeking a meeting with the company.

“Gorgon’s failure poses a major problem for any oil and gas company betting on CCS to meet net zero,” said Ian Porter, the chairperson of Sustainable Energy Now, WA. “CCS simply does not work at the scale and at the price needed.”

–With assistance from James Thornhill.

© 2021 Bloomberg L.P.

Blow for CCS: Chevron's giant carbon capture project falling short of targets

Operator fails to meet requirements under Gorgon's project approvals to sequester at least 80% of CO2 emissions in first five years of operation


Missing CCS targets: Chevron's Gorgon LNG project in Western Australia Photo: CHEVRON

US supermajor Chevron has failed to meet its emission reduction targets at its Gorgon liquefied natural gas project in Western Australia after a troubled start to the carbon capture and storage (CCS) facility.

Chevron confirmed on Monday that it was not going to meet its promised injection rates, with the project only capturing a fraction of the carbon dioxide expected during its first five years of operation.

Under the terms of Gorgon’s project approval, Chevron is required to sequester at least 80% of the CO2 emissions released from the reservoirs that feed the Gorgon LNG plant over a five-year period.

While the first train at Gorgon came online in 2016, issues with the CCS facility did not see it start up until 2019 and continued issues have prevented the facility from operating reliably.

The facility is designed to capture 4 million tonnes per annum of CO2, however, Chevron confirmed Monday that only 5 million tonnes of CO2 had been injected since the August 2019 start-up.
'Shocking failure' for CCS

Renewable energy thinktank, Sustainable Energy Now, believes Chevron's initial five-year report will find Gorgon’s CCS facility only managed to capture 30% of the CO2 it promised.


Emission increase: Chevron faces more Gorgon CCS issuesRead more

“It’s a shocking failure of one of the world’s largest engineering projects. But, given the lack of rigour and testing around the technology that was used, I cannot say it is unexpected,” chairperson of Sustainable Energy Now, WA, Ian Porter said.

“Chevron needs to face significant fines and be forced to offset the more than 6 million tonnes of unauthorised legacy carbon dioxide releases. Gorgon’s failure poses a major problem for any oil and gas company betting on CCS to meet net zero.”

Porter added that he believed oil and gas companies were being “overly optimistic” in their assumptions for the potential success of CCS in order to argue for the expansion of oil and gas extraction.

“CCS simply does not work at the scale and at the price needed to undo the damage that will be created by these projects,” he claimed.

“I sincerely hope CCS does work one day. Ultimately, we need it. But until that time, it is reckless and disingenuous for the industry to keep pretending that it can expand operations and reach net zero.”


Gas producers work to earn their role in energy transitionRead more

Sharing lessons learned

Chevron Australia managing director Mark Hatfield admitted Gorgon had not met its CO2 injection requirements, adding the company was working with the West Australian regulator on making up the shortfall, with details on how the shortfall will be met to be released later this year.

“Like any pioneering endeavour, it takes time to optimise a new system to ensure it performs reliably over 40-plus years of operation. The road hasn’t always been smooth, but the challenges we’ve faced — and overcome — make it easier for those who aspire to reduce their emissions through CCS,” he added.

“We’re committed to sharing the lessons we’ve learned with state and federal governments, research institutes and other energy producers to assist the deployment of CCS in Australia.

“CCS is a proven technology which experts agree is critical to achieving a lower carbon future while ensuring access to affordable and reliable energy for billions around the world who rely on it.”


Hydrogen and CCS take centre stage in Australia's shift to net zeroRead more

While it may have fallen short of its target, Chevron claims the 5 million tonnes captured since the facility’s 2019 start-up represents the largest volume of injection achieved over the same time period by any CCS system globally, with comparable specifications.

"This significant milestone shows how we’re deploying technology, innovation and skills to deliver cleaner energy and reduce our carbon footprint,” Hafield stated.

“The Gorgon carbon capture and storage system is the biggest CCS system designed to capture carbon emissions and is demonstrating Australia’s world-leading capability in the area.”



Industry group the Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association (APPEA) chose not to focus on the project missing its emission reduction requirements, instead highlighting the total the project had been able to successfully sequester.

“Our industry is walking the walk when it comes to reducing emissions. Injecting 5 million tonnes of CO2e is equivalent to taking more than 1.6 million passenger vehicles off Australia’s roads for a year,” APPEA chief executive Andrew McConville stated.


IEA report: Electricity, hydrogen and CCS to dominateRead more

“The Australian oil and gas industry is a world leader in the practical deployment of carbon capture and storage. In Australia, the oil and gas industry has been at the leading edge of researching and deploying CCS and greenhouse gas storage technologies.”

He claimed CCS would help further reduce the nation's emissions, while also providing a pathway to a large-scale clean hydrogen industry.

“CCS shows that technology can be used to further reduce Australia’s emissions and allows our industry to keep supplying electricity generation and being used for products such as clothes, computers, phones, fertilisers and vital medical equipment such as heart valves,” McConville stated.


Carbon footprint of LNG to become key differentiatorRead more

The Gorgon CCS project sees CO2 separated from the gas stream before processing and liquefaction on Barrow Island, and, instead of being flared, it is then injected into the Jurassic Dupuy Formation at a depth of about 2.5 kilometres.

The project includes nine CO2 injection wells at three drill centres, two pressure management drill centres, two reservoir surveillance wells, a seven-kilometre underground pipeline from the LNG plant site to the drill centres and three CO2 compressor modules.

Chevron has previously claimed the CO2 injection system will reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the Gorgon project by about 40%, or more than 100 million tonnes over the life of the project.

Chevron operates the Gorgon project with a 47.3% interest and is partnered by ExxonMobil and Shell, each on 25%, Osaka Gas on 1.25%, Tokyo Gas on 1% and Jera on 0.417%.(Copyright)

Read more

Oil and gas emissions could risk 'killing concept of blue hydrogen', warns Equinor vice president

UK industrial cluster says blue hydrogen needed now to reach net-zero goals

Equinor and SSE look to develop one of world's largest hydrogen storage facilities