Latest market news

Viewpoint: Legal woes to weigh on NOx allowances

  • Market: Coal, Electricity, Emissions, Natural gas
  • 29/12/23

Legal complications that have upended federal efforts to rein in ozone-forming pollution show no sign of abating, likely weighing further on Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) NOx allowances in 2024.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized a "good neighbor" plan earlier this year to curtail interstate migration of NOx emissions that contribute to ground-level ozone and smog. It includes more-stringent CSAPR ozone season NOx caps for power plants. But various federal courts, responding to complaints that EPA acted unlawfully by rejecting state implementation plans for tackling the issue, have issued orders preventing the agency from enforcing new federal limits in 12 states — for now.

The orders have effectively shrunk the size of the CSAPR Group 3 NOx market and left more states than expected in the less-ambitious Group 2 market, which is tied to earlier ozone standards. Prices have plunged — particularly for Group 3 allowances, which peaked at $48,000/short ton (st) last year but were heard to trade for just $1,500/st in November. Power plants have found little reason to buy up allowances now when future compliance responsibilities are hazy and ozone season markets are well supplied.

Courts will provide more clues about the future of the CSAPR program in 2024, guiding EPA as it weighs state ozone plans it has not yet accepted, although progress could be staggered.

A significant decision is likely early in the year, with the US Supreme Court holding oral arguments in February to consider emergency requests to stay the plan nationwide. Lawyers say that it is rare for the court to schedule arguments in response to emergency petitions, which typically involve only written briefs and are handled quickly.

Federal courts have affirmed the legality of similar EPA regulations in the past, including the Supreme Court in 2014 and the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit earlier this year. Three judges on the current Supreme Court were in the 6-2 majority in the 2014 case, including chief justice John Roberts, while justice Clarence Thomas dissented.

Notably, that Supreme Court decision overrode a lower court order written by now-Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh, who said CSAPR limits at the time overcontrolled emissions from upwind states.

Should the Supreme Court reject a nationwide stay, other courts could still add complexity to EPA's enforcement. Regional appeals courts that have temporarily blocked EPA's rejection of state ozone plans are weighing final decisions on varying timelines, creating the potential for contradictory orders, or at least decisions at different times next year.

"It will depend on what are the specific issues before the court, and what the court decides is the appropriate remedy," said Carrie Jenks, executive director of Harvard Law School's Environmental & Energy Law Program.

The courts could task EPA with taking a fresh look at the state plans or give states more time to revise their plans and submit new ones for review, she said.

The cases could resolve more quickly if they are transferred to the DC Circuit, which typically handles national Clean Air Act cases. But the other courts have so far resisted EPA's requests to do just that for the state plan cases. The DC Circuit is in the early stages of reviewing the federal plan's legality, but the court's current briefing schedule makes a final decision unlikely before next year's ozone season.

Stumbling blocks for NOx

As judicial stays effectively increase supply by keeping more power plants in the less-stringent Group 2 market, the faltering competitiveness of coal plants is simultaneously shrinking demand. Coal-fired generation dropped significantly in 2023, leading to an 18pc drop in ozone season NOx emissions among Group 3 power plants. The US Energy Information Administration forecasts a 10pc reduction in coal generation next year.

Absent a nationwide stay, obligations in the 10 participating Group 3 states will become harder in 2024 as more-restrictive budgets come into force, cutting the allowance supply by 8pc from its temporarily inflated levels this year and potentially putting upwards pressure on the record-low Group 3 price. EPA, targeting a Group 3 allowance bank that does not exceed 21pc of the states' 2024 caps, also plans to take thousands of unused allowances out of circulation next year.

But the threat of oversupply — a persistent feature of CSAPR markets, which also include annual programs for NOx and SO2 emissions — still looms large. Power plants in Group 3 emitted less than 49,200st during this year's ozone season, but they will have a budget of around 60,000 allowances next year. NOx budgets are not set to become significantly more stringent until 2026, and EPA might ultimately phase in the most ambitious provisions in particular states even if courts determine the federal plan is legal.

By then, CSAPR obligations could have less to do with the current legal fracas and more to do with which party prevails in the 2024 presidential election. Another term for President Joe Biden could mean new efforts to rein in power plant pollution and potentially tighter air quality standards for ozone, while Republicans have made no secret they see EPA rules, including the "good neighbor" plan, as regulatory overreach.


Sharelinkedin-sharetwitter-sharefacebook-shareemail-share

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News
26/12/24

Viewpoint: US gas market poised for more volatility

Viewpoint: US gas market poised for more volatility

New York, 26 December (Argus) — US natural gas markets may be subjected to more dramatic price swings in 2025 as growing LNG exports and increasingly price-sensitive producers place greater pressure on the US' stagnant gas storage capacity. Those price swings could pose challenges for consumers without ample access to gas supplies, as well as producers interested in keeping some output unhedged to capture potentially higher prices without taking on excessive financial risk. But volatility may also present opportunities for traders looking to exploit unstable price spreads, and for producers that can adapt their operations to fit a more unpredictable pricing environment. Calm before the storm High storage levels and low spot prices this year — averaging $2.11/mmBtu through November this year at the US benchmark Henry Hub — triggered by an unusually warm 2023-24 winter, may have obscured some of the structural factors pushing the US gas market into a more volatile future. But those structural factors remain and loom increasingly large for prices. The US has moved from a roughly 60 Bcf/d (1.7bn m³/d) market eight years ago to a more than 100 Bcf/d market today, "and we haven't grown our storage capacity at all", Rich Brockmeyer, head of North American gas and power at commodity trading house Gunvor, said earlier this year. As supply and demand for US gas grow, the country's roughly 4.7-Tcf storage capacity becomes ever less effective in stemming demand shocks, such as extreme winter weather events, which can more rapidly draw down inventories than in years past. Additionally, a growing share of US gas is being consumed by LNG export terminals being built and expanded on the US Gulf coast. When those facilities encounter unexpected problems and cease operations — as has happened numerous times at the 2 Bcf/d Freeport LNG terminal in Texas in recent years — volumes that were previously being liquefied and sent overseas were instead backed up into the domestic market, crushing prices. More LNG exports may mean more opportunities for such supply shocks. US LNG exports are expected to increase by 15pc to almost 14 Bcf/d in 2025 as operations begin at Venture Global's planned 27.2mn t/yr Plaquemines facility in Louisiana and Cheniere's 11.5mn t/yr Corpus Christi, Texas, stage 3 expansion, US Energy Information Administration data show. Spot price volatility will be most acutely felt in regions like New England that lack underground gas storage. "In areas like the Gulf coast, where you have a lot of storage, it won't be a problem," Alan Armstrong, chief executive of Williams, the largest US gas pipeline company, told Argus in an interview. Producers' trade-off Volatile gas markets are a mixed bag for producers, many of whom profit from volatility while also struggling to plan and budget based on uncertain revenues for unhedged volumes. Though insufficient gas storage deprives the market of stability, "from the standpoint of a marketing and trading guy that's trying to manage my gas supply to customers and my trading book, I love volatility",said Dennis Price, vice president of marketing and trading at Expand Energy, the largest US gas producer by volume. BP chief financial officer Sinead Gorman in November 2023 specifically named Freeport LNG's eight-month-long shutdown in 2022-23 from a fire as a driver of volatility in the global gas market. The supermajor was able to exploit the "incredibly fragile" gas market, she said, which was a key factor driving the success of its integrated gas business. "Those opportunities are what we typically seek and enjoy," Gorman said. Increasingly, producers have also been adapting to a more volatile market by switching production on and off in response to prices, but often without revealing the price at which a supply response will occur. Expand Energy, for instance, told investors in October that it was amassing drilled but uncompleted wells and wells that had yet to be brought on line, which it could activate relatively quickly when prices rise. It declined to name the price at which that would occur. Market participants, attempting to price in this phenomenon by anticipating producers' next moves may respond more dramatically to supply signals than in the past, when production was steadier. Producers' increased responsiveness to prices could help to balance the market somewhat, though more aggressive intervention into operations could take a toll on well performance and pipelines, FactSet senior energy analyst Connor McLean said. Producers are "treating the reservoir itself like a storage facility", Price said. By Julian Hast Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more
News

Viewpoint: Unified CO2 market remains in distance


26/12/24
News
26/12/24

Viewpoint: Unified CO2 market remains in distance

Houston, 26 December (Argus) — Washington state's carbon market enters 2025 on steadier ground than it stood on for much of the past year, but still faces hurdles before it is part of a larger North American market. Washington's cap-and-invest program has weathered a year of highs and lows between advancing its ambitions to link with the Western Climate Initiative and operating through much of the year under threat of repeal in the November state elections. The state Department of Ecology director Laura Watson began the state's quest to link with the WCI last year , as regulators looked to the larger, more liquid market to potentially temper the higher-than-expected prices over the first year of the market in 2023. Washington Carbon Allowances (WCAs) for December 2023 delivery surged as high as $70/t last year, according to Argus assessments. But the state has clinched several wins for its program this year. State lawmakers were able to pass a bill to smooth out several areas of potential incompatibility with the WCI earlier this year, along with California and Quebec agreeing to move forward into formal linkage talks in March . But a repeal effort, initiative 2117, seeking to remove the state's cap-and-invest program dampened prices and forward movement on linkage since January. WCAs for December 2024 delivery fell to the lowest price to date for the program at $30.25/t on 4 March, according to Argus assessments, as uncertainty over the future of the program quieted market participation. State voters backed the cap-and-invest program in November with 62pc against the repeal effort, but months of uncertainty has cost the state time and linkage progress as the WCI awaited the November results. Additionally, while Washington started its own linkage rulemaking in April to align the program with changes planned for the WCI, finishing it requires the joint market first finalize its own changes. The linkage logjam has left market participants feeling that the state's momentum is stalled for the moment, even as perception of the state's eventual joining remains a question of "when" not "if." Ecology says it remains in communication with the WCI members and is evaluating the impact of California's new rulemaking timeline. California has indicated over this year that it does not intend to focus fully on linkage until its current rulemaking is complete. Ecology estimates it will adopt its new rules in fall 2025, with the earliest the state could expect a linkage agreement in late 2025. Washington must still complete further steps required by state law before any linkage agreement can proceed, including an environmental justice assessment and a final evaluation of a potential joint market under criteria set by its Climate Commitment Act, along with public comment. California and Quebec must also conduct their own evaluations to comply with respective state and provincial laws. If this timing works out, Ecology would be part of joint auctions starting in 2026. Compounding the process is the potential threat posed by incoming president-elect Donald Trump, who is likely to try to reverse major environmental regulations and commitments. Trump sought ultimately unsuccessful litigation in his first administration to sever the link between Quebec and California in 2019. The administration pursued the case on the grounds that California's participation violated federal authority to establish trade and other agreements with foreign entities under Article I of the US Constitution, which sets out the role of the federal and state powers in commerce and agreements with foreign powers. Both California and Washington have undergone preparations in recent months to gird themselves for a legal fight with the incoming administration, and that may add further scrutiny to linkage for both states going forward, said Justin Johnson, a market expert with the International Emissions Trading Association. "I think that it will require them to be more vigilant about the process they use and making sure they dot their i's and cross their t's because I think that there will be some folks in the federal administration who would like to see that not happen," Johnson said. By Denise Cathey Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Viewpoint: California dairy fight spills into 2025


24/12/24
News
24/12/24

Viewpoint: California dairy fight spills into 2025

Houston, 24 December (Argus) — California must begin crafting dairy methane limits next year as pressure grows for regulators to change course. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has committed to begin crafting regulations that could mandate the reduction of dairy methane as it locked in incentives for harvesting gas to fuel vehicles in the state. The combination has frustrated environmental groups and other opponents of a methane capture strategy they accuse of collateral damage. Now, tough new targets pitched to help balance the program's incentives could become the fall-out in a new lawsuit. State regulators have repeatedly said that the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) is ill-suited to consider mostly off-road emissions from a sector that could pack up and move to another state to escape regulation. California's LCFS requires yearly reductions of transportation fuel carbon intensity. Higher-carbon fuels that exceed the annual limits incur deficits that suppliers must offset with credits generated from the distribution to the state of approved, lower-carbon alternatives. Regulators extended participation in the program to dairy methane in 2017. Dairies may register to use manure digesters to capture methane that suppliers may process into pipeline-quality natural gas. This gas may then be attributed to compressed natural gas vehicles in California, so long as participants can show a path for approved supplies between the dairy and the customer. California only issues credits for methane cuts beyond other existing requirements. Regulators began mandating methane reductions from landfills more than a decade ago and in 2016 set similar requirements for wastewater treatment plants. But while lawmakers set a goal for in-state dairies to reduce methane emissions by 40pc from 2030 levels, regulators could not even consider rulemakings mandating such reductions until 2024. CARB made no move to directly regulate those emissions at their first opportunity, as staff grappled with amendments to the agency's LCFS and cap-and-trade programs. That has meant that dairies continue to receive credit for all of the methane they capture, generating deep, carbon-reducing scores under the LCFS and outsized credit production relative to the fuel they replace. Dairy methane harvesting generated 16pc of all new credits generated in 2023, compared with biodiesel's 6pc. Dairy methane replaced just 38pc of the diesel equivalent gallons that biodiesel did over the same period. The incentive has exasperated environmental and community groups, who see LCFS credits as encouraging larger operations with more consequences for local air and water quality. Dairies warn that costly methane capture systems could not be affordable otherwise. Adding to the expense of operating in California would cause more operations to leave the state. California dairies make up about two thirds of suppliers registered under the program. Dairy supporters successfully delayed proposed legislative requirements in 2023. CARB staff in May 2024 declined a petition seeking a faster approach to dairy regulation . Staff committed to take up a rulemaking considering the best way to address dairy methane reduction in 2025. Before that, final revisions to the LCFS approved in November included guarantees for dairy methane crediting. Projects that break ground by the end of this decade would remain eligible for up to 30 years of LCFS credit generation, compared with just 10 years for projects after 2029. Limits on the scope of book-and-claim participation for out-of-state projects would wait until well into the next decade. Staff said it was necessary to ensure continued investment in methane reduction. The inclusion immediately frustrated critics of the renewable natural gas policy, including board member Diane Tarkvarian, who sought to have the changes struck and was one of two votes ultimately against the LCFS revisions. Environmental groups have now sued , invoking violations that effectively froze the LCFS for years of court review. Regulators and lawmakers working to transition the state to cleaner air and lower-emissions vehicles will have to tread carefully in 2025. By Elliott Blackburn Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

South Korea to invest $309bn in green finance by 2030


24/12/24
News
24/12/24

South Korea to invest $309bn in green finance by 2030

Singapore, 24 December (Argus) — South Korea plans to invest 450 trillion won ($309bn) in green finance by 2030, acting president and prime minister Han Duck-soo said on 23 December. The country is also "actively encouraging private investment by upgrading the Korean Green Taxonomy system", Han added. The taxonomy is technical legislation that classifies the industrial carbon and environmental footprint for investors. It aims to promote green finance and prevent ‘greenwashing', with the aim of achieving a sustainable circular economy. The most important issue for the industrial sector, which accounts for about 36pc of domestic emissions, is to transition to carbon neutrality, Han said. South Korea has an "export-driven economic structure with high external dependence", he said, which means international carbon barriers will significantly affect South Korea. This makes decarbonisation key to maintaining competitiveness, he added. South Korea is also responding to the climate crisis through technological innovation. The country's science ministry last week unveiled plans to invest almost W2.75 trillion to develop technology to respond to climate change in 2025. By Tng Yong Li Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Viewpoint: US LPG cargo premiums poised to fall


23/12/24
News
23/12/24

Viewpoint: US LPG cargo premiums poised to fall

Houston, 23 December (Argus) — The booming US LPG export market has fueled record spot fees this year for terminal operators that send those cargoes abroad, but those fees are poised to fall next year as additional export capacity comes online. US propane exports surged over the past two years, hitting an all-time high of 1.85mn b/d in the first quarter of this year, according to data from the US Energy Information Administration (EIA). Terminal fees for spot propane cargoes out of the US Gulf coast hit an all-time high of Mont Belvieu +32.5¢/USG (+$169.325/t) in mid-September. US propane production is expected to grow by another 80,000 b/d in 2025 to 2.22mn b/d while the outlook for domestic consumption is fairly steady, at 820,000 b/d next year — meaning even more propane will be pushed into the waterborne market. But that is dependent on US infrastructure keeping up with the pace of production. US export terminals in Houston, Nederland and Freeport, Texas, have run at or above capacity for the last two years given the thirst for cheaper US feedstock, largely from propane dehydrogenation (PDH) plant operators in China. This demand has created bottlenecks at US docks, and midstream operators like Enterprise, Energy Transfer, and Targa have rushed to ramp up spending on both pipelines and additional refrigeration to stay ahead of the wave of additional production. US gas output spurs LPG exports As upstream producers have ramped up natural gas production ahead of new LNG projects, most producers are counting on LPG demand from international outlets in Asia to offload the ethane and propane the US cannot consume. For the past four years, Asian buyers have been more than happy to oblige. US propane exports to China rose from zero in 2019, when China imposed tariffs on US imports, to an average of 1.36mn metric tonnes (t) per month in January-November 2024, according to data from analytics firm Kpler, making China the largest offtaker of US shipments. US exports to Japan averaged 480,000t per month throughout most of 2024, and exports to Korea averaged 460,000t per month in the first 11 months of 2024. China, Korea, and Japan received 52pc of US propane exports in 2024, up from 49pc in 2020, according to data from Vortexa. Strong demand in Asia has kept delivered prices in Japan high enough to sustain an open arbitrage between the US and the Argus Far East Index (AFEI). Forward-month in-well propane prices at Mont Belvieu, Texas, have remained well below delivered propane on the AFEI. In 2020, Mont Belvieu Enterprise (EPC) propane averaged a $143/t discount to delivered AFEI — a spread that has only widened as additional PDH units in Asia have come online. During the first 11 months of 2024, the Mont Belvieu to AFEI spread averaged a hefty $219/t, leaving plenty of room for wider netbacks in the form of higher terminal fees for US sellers, especially as a wave of new VLGCs entering the global market has left shipowners with less leverage to take advantage of the wider arbitrage. The resulting wider arbitrage to Asia has kept US export terminals running full for the last two years. So when a series of weather-related events and maintenance in May-September limited the number of spot cargoes operators could sell and delayed scheduled shipments, term buyers willing to resell any of their loadings could effectively name their price. This spurred the record-high premiums for spot propane cargoes in September. New projects may narrow premium An increase in US midstream firm investments in additional dock capacity and added refrigeration in the years ahead could narrow those terminal fees, however. Announced projects from Enterprise and Energy Transfer, in particular, will add a combined 550,000 b/d of LPG export capacity out of Houston and Nederland, Texas by the end of 2026. Enterprise's new Neches River terminal project near Beaumont, Texas, will add another 360,000 b/d of either ethane or propane export capacity in the same timeframe. These additions are poised to limit premiums for spot cargoes by the end of 2025. Already, it appears the spike in spot cargo premiums to Mont Belvieu has abated for the rest of 2024. Spot terminal fees for propane sank to Mont Belvieu +14¢/USG by the end of November. The lower premiums come not only as terminals resume a more normal loading schedule, but at the same time a surplus of tons into Asia ahead of winter heating demand has narrowed the arbitrage. The spread between in-well EPC propane at Mont Belvieu fell from $214.66/t to $194.45/t during November. A backwardated market for AFEI paper into the second quarter of 2025 means US prices are poised to fall more in order to keep the spread from narrowing further. By Amy Strahan Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Generic Hero Banner

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more