N Dakota CO2 pipeline project awaits new hearing

Spanish Market: Emissions
20/10/23

North Dakota regulators will soon reconsider the once-rejected Midwest Carbon Express CO2 Pipeline Project, but opposition remains for the $5.5bn carbon dioxide (CO2) transport and storage project in the state and beyond.

Summit Carbon Solutions wants to link CO2-producing ethanol plants in Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota to underground storage north of Bismarck, North Dakota, via a 2,000 mile (3,218km) pipeline system. The project could store up to 12mn tons of CO2 annually, according to the developers.

The scope of the project has required a considerable amount of public and landowner consultation for Summit which has encountered resistance in several jurisdictions. Summit's original application in North Dakota was rejected on 4 August, with the North Dakota Public Service Commission (PSC) citing Summit's unresponsiveness to "outstanding legitimate impacts" by concerned landowners. At issue were eminent domain, safety, property valuation and CO2 sequestration storage policy concerns, among others in the application that was filed in October 2022.

Summit on 18 August filed a revised permit application with several changes including reroutes, reducing the width of the project's corridor and workarounds with several key landowners. The PSC agreed to rehear the application, but a hearing date for the Iowa-based company to make its case is still to be decided, as another motion on another issue by Summit has yet to be argued.

That issue is outlined in a 29 September request by Summit to the PSC to supersede and preempt ordinances in two counties, Burleigh and Emmons, that it says conflict with both state law relating to carbon sequestration and the federal Pipeline Safety Act. Opponents of the project, led by former Bismarck mayor John Warford, say the request should not be entertained because the project has not even been approved.

"Summit's latest effort to waste the Commission's and the parties' resources should not be rewarded, and the motion can and should be denied on this basis alone," the opposition group, the Bismarck Area Intervenors, wrote in a 12 October letter to the PSC.

Summit has also not demonstrated how existing county ordinances prevent the company from building the pipeline, according to the coalition that also includes two prominent Bismarck-based property developers.

The Laborers District Council of Minnesota and North Dakota, a union representing about 13,000 workers, said it supports Summit's request to supersede and preempt the county ordinances, saying "regulatory patchwork from one jurisdiction to another" deters investment and complicates development.

The PSC on 16 October motioned to set a hearing date for Summit's ordinance request, but that, along with a date for the rehearing of Summit's permit application, has yet to be decided.

The North Dakota PSC this week also said it needed more information from Summit, asking for detailed maps, easements granted by county, number of suppliers signed up to utilize the proposed pipeline, among other items. Summit has until the end of the month to provide these details.

South Dakota last month denied Summit's permit application for the pipeline in that state for failing to work with counties and their ordinances. Another CO2 pipeline and storage project, the Heartland Greenway pipeline, was cancelled today because of ongoing regulatory challenges, citing in part a denied permit in South Dakota.

Minnesota and Iowa are still going through the hearing process for parts of the Summit project there, with landowners in each state voicing concern over the project.

By Brett Holmes

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.

14/01/25

New York to propose GHG market rules in 'coming months’

Houston, 14 January (Argus) — Draft rules for New York's carbon market will be ready in the "coming months," governor Kathy Hochul (D) said today. Regulators from the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) "will take steps forward on" establishing a cap-and-invest program and propose new emissions reporting requirements for sources while also creating "a robust investment planning process," Hochul said during her state of the state message. But the governor did not provide a timeline for the process beyond saying the agency's work do this work "over the coming months." Hochul's remarks come after regulators in September delayed plans to begin implementing New York's cap-and-invest program (NYCI) to 2026. At the time, DEC deputy commissioner Jon Binder said that draft regulations would be released "in the next few months." DEC, NYSERDA and Hochul's office each did not respond to requests for comment. Some environmental groups applauded Hochul's remarks, while also expressing concern about the state's next steps. Evergreen Action noted that the timeline for NYCI "appears uncertain" and called on lawmakers to "commit to this program in the 2025 budget." "For New York's economy, environment and legacy, we hope the governor commits to finalizing a cap-and-invest program this year," the group said. State law from 2019 requires New York to achieve a 40pc reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from 1990 levels by 2030 and an 85pc reduction by 2050. A state advisory group in 2022 issued a scoping plan that recommended the creation of an economy-wide carbon market to help the state reach those goals. By Ida Balakrishna Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

California GHG rulemaking hits speedbump

14/01/25

California GHG rulemaking hits speedbump

Houston, 14 January (Argus) — The California Air Resources Board (CARB) cap-and-trade program rulemaking is likely to weather further delays, according to one of the agency's top officials. The agency's "immediate" responsibility is to work with covered entities impacted by the ongoing Los Angeles County wildfires across its programs, according to deputy executive officer Rajinder Sahota. This means that the rulemaking is not "imminent or in the next few weeks." In addition, the agency needs to move carefully given the federal administration change , along with the negative response to proposed updates to the state's Low Carbon Fuel Standard received last year. CARB continues to evaluate program changes, with a focus on affordability, ambition and compliance costs. "We want to take time to ensure we get out foundational facts about the program especially as the legislature takes up the post-2030 role of the program," Sahota said. The cap-and-trade rulemaking has been marked by a series of delays, as regulators initially in 2023 estimated it would finish last year. In December , CARB said it would delay the publication of draft amendments until early 2025. CARB began to prepare for the rulemaking nearly two years ago, floating the idea of moving the cap-and-trade program to a more-stringent 2030 greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction target of a 48pc, compared with 1990 levels, rather than the current 40pc mandate. The agency's 2022 Scoping Plan prompted the idea as it showed a need for increased program ambition for California to remain on track for its target of net-zero by 2045. In line with this increased ambition, CARB will need to remove at least 180mn metric tonnes (t) of allowances from the 2026-2030 auction and allocation annual budgets to start with, and up to 265mn t in total from the program budgets from 2026-2045, agency staff have said. Quebec, California's partner in the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) carbon market, previously delayed publishing its draft package from the originally planned September 2024 to the first quarter of this year, with implementation expected in the spring. While the regulation was nearly complete in late September, the Quebec Environmental Ministry decided to postpone, citing the need to wait for California. If California delays its work through the first quarter of the year, this will likely require Quebec to also push back its rulemaking. This will also shorten the runway for both market partners to formally implement changes by 2026. The news has punctured the bullish sentiment for market participants on a timely end to the rulemaking. California carbon allowances for December delivery initially traded as high as $35.25/t on the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) ahead of the announcement. The contract traded as low as $33.01/t after midday on Nodal Exchange following the news, before sliding lower in later trade. Outside of the WCI, Washington is also likely to see a slowdown in its carbon market ambitions. The state Department of Ecology is conducting its own rulemaking to align Washington's "cap-and-invest" program to facilitate linkage with the larger WCI market. But it will require California and Quebec to finalize their expected changes. California has indicated over last year that it does not intend to focus fully on linkage until its current rulemaking is complete. California's and Quebec's cap-and-trade programs cover major sources of the state's GHG emissions, including power plants and transportation fuels. By Denise Cathey Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

EU air traffic growth threatens carbon budget: Study

14/01/25

EU air traffic growth threatens carbon budget: Study

London, 14 January (Argus) — European aviation's Paris climate agreement-aligned carbon budget will be depleted by 2026 if air traffic grows as industry expects in the coming years, according to a study by Brussels-based non-governmental organisation Transport & Environment. While the EU has pledged to reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, the aviation sector is still expected to emit 79mn t CO2 by this date, according to scenarios put forward by European aircraft manufacturer Airbus and US-based Boeing. Airbus sees air traffic growing at an average rate of 5.7pc/yr in 2024-27 and by 2.6pc/yr in 2024-43, while Boeing expects a 5.6pc/yr rise in 2024-33 and a 2.5pc/yr rise in 2024-43, Transport & Environment said. If these projections are accurate, the aviation sector carbon budget needed to remain in line with the Paris accord's goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels would be depleted by 2026, the study found. Aircraft will have to burn 59pc more fuel in 2050 than in 2019 to meet this increased demand, the study found, even after taking into consideration efficiency improvements. This growth in traffic would also cancel out the benefits of sustainable aviation fuels (SAFs). The expected growth also implies that the sector could be burning as much fossil kerosine in 2050 as it did in 2023 — some 21.1mn t — even with 42pc of fuel use covered by SAFs under EU mandates, Transport & Environment said. The EU expects air traffic growth to be 60pc lower than the Airbus and Boeing projections. But even this smaller increase would mean emissions rising by 46pc by 2040 against 1990 levels, the study found. Transport & Environment called for all flights departing the EU to be included in the bloc's emissions trading system (ETS) by 2027, as part of efforts to make air ticket prices reflect the sector's climate impact. The scheme currently applies only to journeys within the European Economic Area. Tax exemptions on jet fuel should also be removed and value added tax applied to air tickets, the NGO said. It also recommended halting the expansion of airport infrastructure and improving rail infrastructure so that the railways can compete with air travel. And it called for penalties for non-compliance with SAF mandates and financial support for SAF production through auctions and contracts for difference. The European Commission's proposed target to cut the EU's overall net emissions by 90pc by 2040 from 1990 levels "is completely meaningless without concrete policies to reduce emissions from aviation", the NGO's aviation director, Jo Dardenne, said. By Navneet Vyasan Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

California governor eyes carbon market extension

10/01/25

California governor eyes carbon market extension

Houston, 10 January (Argus) — California governor Gavin Newsom (D) is planning to start discussions with lawmakers to enact a formal extension of the state's cap-and-trade program. Newsom included the idea in the 2025-26 budget proposal he released on Friday. "The administration, in partnership with the legislature, will need to consider extending the cap-and-trade program beyond 2030 to achieve carbon neutrality," the governor's budget overview says. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) believes it has the authority to operate the program beyond 2030, but a legislative extension would put it on much firmer footing. The cap-and-trade program, which covers major sources of the state's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including power plants and transportation fuels, requires a 40pc cut from 1990 levels by 2030. CARB is eyeing tightening that target to 48pc as part of a rulemaking that could take effect next year to help keep the state on a path to carbon neutrality by 2045. Newsom's budget proposal highlighted the need to weigh the revenue received from the program carbon allowance auctions. That money goes to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), which supports the state's clean economy transition through programs targeting GHG emissions reductions, such as subsidizing purchases for zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs). The budget plan added few new climate commitments, instead prioritizing funding agreed to last year. The governor's $322.3bn 2025-26 budget proposal would continue cost-saving measures the state enacted in its 2024-25 budget to deal with a multi-billion-dollar deficit. These included shifting portions of expenditures from the state general fund to the GGRF over multiple budget years, such as $900mn for the state's Clean Energy Reliability Investment Plan. The state's $10bn Climate Bond, passed by voters in November 2024, would cover the majority of new climate-related spending, including taking on $32mn of the reliability plan spending. The change in funding source would allow the state Department of Motor Vehicles to utilize $81mn in GGRF funds to cover expenditures from CARB's Mobile Source Emissions Research Program. The governor's budget would also advance his proposal from October for CARB to evaluate allowing fuel blends with 15pc ethanol (E15) in the state, as a measure to lower gas prices. CARB would receive $2.3mn from Newsom's proposal to finish the multi-tier study it began in 2018 and implement the necessary regulatory changes to allow E15 at the pump. Currently, California allows only fuel blends with up to E10 because of environmental concerns, such as the potential for increased emissions of NOx, which contributes to smog, by allowing more ethanol. With the administration predicting a modest surplus of $363mn from higher state revenues, it is unlikely that California will return to the belt tightening of the past two state budgets. But the state cautions that tension with the incoming president-elect Donald Trump, potential import tariffs and ongoing state revenue volatility should leave California on guard for any potential future fiscal pitfalls. The state's legislature's non-partisan adviser cautioned in November that government spending continues to outpace revenues, with future deficits likely. The administration is keeping an eye on the issue, which could result in changes through the governor's May budget revision, state director of finance Joe Stephenshaw said. By Denise Cathey Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US issues 45Z tax guidance for low-carbon fuels

10/01/25

US issues 45Z tax guidance for low-carbon fuels

Washington, 10 January (Argus) — US producers of low-carbon fuels can start claiming the "45Z" tax credit providing up to $1/USG for road use and $1.75/USG for aviation, following the US Treasury Department's release today of proposed guidance for the credit. The guidance includes proposed regulations and other tools to determine the eligibility of fuels for the 45Z tax credit, which was created by the Inflation Reduction Act to replace a suite of incentives for biofuels that expired at the end of last year. Biofuel producers have been clamoring for guidance from the US Treasury Department so they can start claiming the tax credit, which is available for fuels produced from 1 January 2025 through the end of 2027. "This guidance will help put America on the cutting-edge of future innovation in aviation and renewable fuel while also lowering transportation costs for consumers," US deputy treasury secretary Wally Adeymo said. "Decarbonizing transportation and lowering costs is a win-win for America." The creation of the 45Z tax credit has already prompted a change in US biofuels markets by shifting federal subsidies from blenders to producers. Because the value of tax credit increases for fuels with the lowest lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, it could encourage refiners to source more waste feedstocks such as used cooking oil, rather than conventional crop-based feedstocks. While the guidance is still just a proposal, taxpayers are able to "immediately" use the guidance to claim the 45Z tax credit, until Treasury issues additional guidance, an administration official said. The guidance on 45Z released today affirms that only the producer for the fuel is eligible to claim the credit, not blenders. To be eligible for the tax credit, the fuel must have a "practical or commercial fitness for use in a highway vehicle or aircraft" by itself or when blended into a mixture, Treasury said. Marine diesel and methanol suitable for highway or aircraft use are also eligible for 45Z, as is renewable natural gas that can be used as a transportation fuel. Treasury also released an "annual emissions rate table" offering providers a methodology for determining the lifecycle GHG of fuel. Treasury said a key emissions model from the US Department of Energy, called 45ZCF-GREET, used to calculate the value of the 45Z tax credit is anticipated to be released today, although industry officials said it may be delayed until next week. Treasury said it intends to propose regulations at "a future date" for calculating the GHG emissions benefits of "climate smart agriculture" practices for "cultivating domestic corn, soybeans, and sorghum as feedstocks" for fuel. Those regulations could lower the calculated lifecycle emissions of fuel from those crop-based feedstocks and increase the relative 45Z tax credit. US biofuel producers said they are still awaiting key details on the 45Z tax credit, including the update to the GREET model. Among the outstanding questions is if the guidance released today provides "enough certainty to negotiate feedstock and fuel offtake agreements going forward", said the Clean Fuels America Alliance, an industry group that represents the biodiesel, renewable diesel and sustainable aviation fuel industries. It is unclear how president-elect Donald Trump intends to approach this proposed approach for the 45Z credit, which will be subject to a 90-day public comment period. Trump has promised to "rescind all unspent funds" from the Inflation Reduction Act. But outright repealing 45Z would leave biofuels producers and farmers without a subsidy they say is needed to sustain growth, after the expiration last year of a $1/USG blender tax credit and a tax credit of up to $1.75/USG for sustainable aviation fuel. Biofuel and soybean groups were unsuccessful in a push last year to extend the expiring biofuel tax credits. The 45Z credit is likely to be debated in Congress this year, as Republicans consider repealing parts of the Inflation Reduction Act. House Republicans have already asked for input on revisions to the 45Z credit, signaling they could modify the incentive. In a tightly divided Congress, farm-state lawmakers may hold enough leverage to ensure some type of biofuel incentive — and potentially one friendlier to agricultural producers than 45Z — survives. By Chris Knight and Cole Martin Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

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