Mariner East 2 NGL pipeline begins service

: LPG, Natural gas, Petrochemicals
18/12/29

Energy Transfer Partners' 275,000 b/d Mariner East 2 natural gas liquids (NGL) pipeline is now in service, connecting the Marcellus shale producing area to the export dock at Marcus Hook, near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

The pipeline, which has faced years of legal and regulatory delays because of homeowner and environmental complaints, will initially run below 200,000 b/d as the company uses a repurposed 12-inch (30cm) products pipeline to circumvent a section of the mainline in Chester and Delaware counties.

The line carries ethane, propane and butane from gas processing plants in Ohio, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania. The Marcus Hook terminal stores NGLs for distribution and offers refrigerated loading of cargoes, with much of the exported volume destined for markets in northwest Europe. Propane and ethane are currently exported from the same terminal via the 70,000 b/d Mariner East 1 pipeline.

Energy Transfer announced a new open season on ME2 on 30 November, seeking commitments for transportation from the Marcellus to Claymont, Delaware, and Marcus Hook. A 250,000 b/d parallel line, Mariner East 2X, is scheduled to begin service by the end of 2019.

The start of service on Mariner East 2 comes after months of legal battles with Pennsylvania regulators and homeowner complaints over directional drilling during its construction. On 11 December, an administrative law judge for the state's Public Utility Commission denied residents' request for an emergency order halting work on the line. But on 19 December, the Chester County district attorney announced his office would launch a criminal investigation into the construction of all three Mariner lines in that vicinity, claiming the company used "bullying" tactics with residents and demanding more information about sinkholes and any geologic anomalies in the area. An Energy Transfer statement that same day called the claims "baseless" and said the company would aggressively defend itself against the district attorney's allegations.

Energy Transfer subsidiary Sunoco Logistics was fined $12.6mn by Pennsylvania's Department of Environmental Protection in February for permit violations related to construction.

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.

25/04/10

Oil and gas lobby calls H2 'core competency,' hails 45v

Houston, 10 April (Argus) — The oil and gas industry views hydrogen production as a "core competency" and sees 45v tax credits driving US exports and innovation, according to the American Petroleum Institute (API). "We really see this, especially from the oil and gas perspective, as a core competency," said Rachel Fox, API director of policy and strategy, on a webinar Thursday hosted by ConservAmerica. "We have such an advantageous opportunity with this credit," said Fox. "When we're talking about the export opportunity, we really do hold the cards in terms of producing hydrogen at the lowest cost anywhere in the world." The 45V incentive has become a crucible in President Donald Trump's agenda to promote fossil fuels. A broad-based coalition of groups sometimes at odds with one another has coalesced in favor of 45V noting that it promotes manufacturing jobs across rural America and sets up US energy companies to dominate growing global demand for cleaner burning fuels. Nonetheless, ConservAmerica described such energy tax incentives as being "squarely in the crosshairs" as legislators gear up for budget negotiations in which the administration is looking to slash government spending to offset a promised corporate tax cut. By tying a tiered scale of incentives to carbon intensity, 45V has spurred oil and gas companies to develop technologies and practices that curb emissions, said Fox. "There's a lot of incentive to try to hit that $3 mark by getting your hydrogen produced at a really low carbon-intensity limit and so it's galvanized a ton of innovation and a ton of new ideas on how that can be done throughout the natural gas system," said Fox. Most of those ideas revolve around lowering the methane intensity of natural gas production or sourcing low-methane intensity natural gas, such as from biowaste, said Fox. Some environmental advocates are skeptical that emissions from natural-gas based hydrogen production can be driven low enough to qualify for the highest $3/kg tier with existing technology and that most oil and gas companies will instead have to use less lucrative 45Q credits that apply to carbon capture and storage technology (CCS). However, at least one major energy company, ExxonMobil, has said it is seeking 45V to advance its massive natural-gas based hydrogen and ammonia project in Baytown, Texas. By Jasmina Kelemen Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Norway plans to cut GHGs, but remain oil, gas producer

25/04/10

Norway plans to cut GHGs, but remain oil, gas producer

London, 10 April (Argus) — Norway's government has proposed a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction of a minimum 70-75pc by 2035, from a 1990 baseline, but has also committed to the country remaining "a stable and predictable supplier of oil and gas produced with low emissions". The government today set out plans for a 2035 GHG reduction target, as well as a wider climate plan for the country. The 2035 GHG reduction targets build on Norway's 2030 goal of "at least" a 55pc reduction in GHGs, again from 1990 levels. Norway has a legislated goal of "a low-emission society" by 2050 — GHG reductions of 90-95pc from the 1990 baseline. Norway's government underlined its commitment to Paris climate agreement goals and phasing out the use of fossil fuels "towards 2050", but also said that it would "not prepare a strategy for the end phase of Norwegian oil and gas". "The government's plan is about phasing out emissions, not industries", it said, noting that Norway is "a significant contributor to Europe's energy security". Norway is the largest producer and only net exporter of oil and gas in Europe. "The government will further develop the petroleum industry and facilitate the future provision of fields… production will continue to be efficient and with low emissions," the government said. It aims for the country's oil and gas sector — the country's highest-emitting industry — to bring emissions from production to net zero in 2050. The bulk of oil and gas emissions are from downstream use — known as scope 3. Norway plans to achieve the majority of its proposed 70-75pc GHG cuts through national measures, including reduced fossil fuel use and both technical and nature-based carbon removals. It also plans to purchase emissions reductions from outside the EU and European Economic Area. This refers to internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs) — emission credits — under Article 6 of the Paris climate agreement. Norway's parliament will consider the proposals. Once legislated in the country's climate act, Norway plans to communicate its updated plans to the UN. Signatories to the Paris climate agreement are expected to submit updated climate plans — known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs) — to UN climate body the UNFCCC every five years. The deadline for NDCs setting out climate goals up to 2035 was in February, but many countries have yet to submit plans . By Georgia Gratton Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

EU exempts most LLDPE imports from retaliatory tariffs

25/04/10

EU exempts most LLDPE imports from retaliatory tariffs

London, 10 April (Argus) — Most linear low density polyethylene (LLDPE) imports will be exempt from EU retaliatory tariffs should the bloc go ahead with countermeasures against the US, according to a draft list of products seen by Argus . The EU has put the retaliatory tariffs on hold for now, after US president Donald Trump announced on Wednesday that he is pausing his planned "reciprocal" tariffs for 90 days. The European Commission has yet to publish the final list of US products that would be subject to any countermeasures, but before Trump's surprise move, the HS code 39014000 was removed. The list was approved by a majority vote of EU member states on Wednesday . Other HS codes of PE grades were included in the draft list and are earmarked for 25pc tariffs. It is now uncertain if and when the EU tariffs might be implemented. Prior to Trump's u-turn, 15 May was the likely date for EU tariffs on US PE imports. But "everything is paused," European Commission trade spokesperson Olof Gill told Argus . LLDPE imports into the EU are categorised under the HS codes 39014000 and 39011010. The former made up just over half of all PE imports to the EU from the US in 2024, while the latter accounted for less than 12pc. The EU's PE imports from the US totalled 1.8mn t last year. Market participants told Argus that the EU will remain dependant on LLDPE imports from the US for specific grades, which include LLDPE butene and metallocene LLDPE. The UK also excluded US-origin LLDPE imports falling under the HS code 390140 from its provisional list of products that could be subject to retaliatory tariffs. By Sam Hashmi and Dafydd ab Iago Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Trump coal plant bailout renews first term fight

25/04/09

Trump coal plant bailout renews first term fight

Washington, 9 April (Argus) — President Donald Trump's effort to stop the retirement of coal-fired power plants is reminiscent of a 2017 attempt that faltered in the face of widespread industry opposition. Trump, in an executive order signed on Tuesday, directed the US Department of Energy (DOE) to tap into emergency powers to stop the retirement of coal-fired plants and other large plants it believes are critical to grid reliability. The order sets a 30-day deadline for DOE to decide which plants are critical based on a new methodology that will analyze if reserve margins, or the percent of unused capacity at peak demand, are at an "acceptable" level. The initiative shares similarities to Trump's unsuccessful effort in his first term to bail out coal and nuclear plants. In the 2017 effort, Trump backed a "grid resiliency" proposal to compensate power plants with 90 days of on-site fuel. But an unusual coalition of natural gas industry groups, manufacturers, renewable producers and environmentalists united against the idea, warning it would upend power markets and cost consumers billions of dollars each year. The US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission voted 5-0 to reject the proposal. It remains unclear if a similarly sized coalition will emerge to fight Trump's latest proposal, under which DOE would use emergency powers in section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act to keep some coal plants and other large power plants operating. Industry groups have largely been avoiding taking positions that could be seen as critical of Trump. Environmentalists say they strongly oppose keeping coal plants operating using emergency powers. Doing so would mean more air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, they say, and higher costs for consumers. Environmental groups say they are hoping other industries affected by the potential bailout will eventually speak out against the initiative. "The silence from those who know better is deafening," Center for Biological Diversity climate law institute legal director Jason Rylander said. "I hope that we will start to see more resistance to these dangerous policies before significant damage is done." DOE said it was "already hard at work" to implement Trump's executive order, which was paired with other orders that were meant to support coal mining and coal production. US energy secretary Chris Wright said today that reviving coal will increase the reliability of the electrical grid and bring down electricity costs, but he has not shared further details on the 202(c) initiative. Trying to litigate the program could be "tricky", and section 202(c) orders have never successfully been challenged in court, in part because they are usually short-term orders, Harvard Law School Electricity Law Initiative director Ari Peskoe said. But opponents could challenge them by focusing on "numerous legal problems", he said, such as not allowing public comment or running afoul of a US Supreme Court precedent that prohibits agencies from attempting to decide "major questions" without clear congressional authorization. "Here DOE would use a little-used statute explicitly written for short-term emergencies in order to PREVENT a change in the US energy mix," Peskoe said. A projected 8.1GW of coal-fired generation is set to retire this year, equivalent to nearly 5pc of the coal fleet, the US Energy Information Administration said last month. Electric utilities often decide which plants to retire years in advance, allowing them to defer maintenance and to forgo capital investments in aging facilities. Keeping coal plants running could require exemptions from environmental rules or pricey capital investments, the costs of which would likely be distributed among other ratepayers. By Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Leaderless S Korea faces energy policy uncertainty

25/04/09

Leaderless S Korea faces energy policy uncertainty

Any significant shift in nuclear policy may be detrimental to South Korea's power balance, regardless of who wins the upcoming election, writes Evelyn Lee London, 9 April (Argus) — South Korea's constitutional court has upheld president Yoon Suk-Yeol's impeachment over his short-lived imposition of martial law last year. The immediate impact of Yoon's removal on the energy market is limited, but the ensuing snap election could see a change in nuclear policy that may strengthen demand for thermal generation, particularly less carbon-intensive gas-fired power. Yoon's impeachment was upheld by a unanimous decision in the country's constitutional court on 4 April, essentially ending his presidency on account of the six-hour martial law he enacted on 3 December. The country will hold a snap election on 3 June to decide its 21st president, under a constitutional requirement for a successor to be elected within 60 days of the presidential office becoming vacant. The confirmation of Yoon's departure raises questions about the energy policies he had purs ued. Yoon put an end to former president Moon Jae-In's nuclear phase-out policy and resumed construction of the 1.4GW Shin-Hanul 3 and 4 reactors, which are currently scheduled to be completed in October 2032 and October 2033, respectively, according to operator Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power. Progress on the two facilities means construction is likely to continue even after Yoon's departure, but his efforts to extend operating licences for reactors that are nearing their designed life span may not get any further. But any significant shift in nuclear policy may be detrimental to South Korea's power balance in the coming years. Nuclear energy is set to account for 203.2TWh of the country's power supply by 2030, representing a 31.8pc share of the generation mix, according to Seoul's latest long-term power plan . Based on this, South Korea could have about 23GW of installed nuclear capacity in 2030, compared with 24.5GW at present. But eight reactors accounting for a combined 6.85GW of capacity are scheduled to reach their life span by 2030, according to Argus analysis, while only two 1.4GW reactors — Saeul 3 and 4 — are set to be brought on line before 2030 (see chart). At least 4.05GW of nuclear capacity needs to be approved for permit extensions in order for the 2030 installed capacity target to be met, Argus analysis shows, in line with the power plan's stipulation for "continued operation of existing nuclear plants whose operating licences expire within eight years", although it does not specify which units fall into this category. For comparison, South Korea's nuclear fleet was scheduled to have 20.4GW of capacity in 2030 under former president Moon's last power plan, released in December 2020, which assumed all expired reactors would be retired. Short on change South Korea may not be able to afford to phase out its nuclear fleet, at least for the next five years, regardless of who becomes the new president. Liberal opposition Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-Myung is regarded as the top contender to win the presidential election, with a double-digit lead in recent polls. It remains unclear whether Lee supports extending the life span of reactors that have expired, but he has previously shown support for maintaining nuclear plants that are in operation or under construction, instead of a complete phase-out of nuclear power. If Lee wins the election and decides to retire nuclear reactors when they reach their current life span, the role of LNG is likely to strengthen in the South Korean energy mix. Lee is well-known for his support of renewable power generation and building an "energy highway" by decentralising the country's power grid and expanding transmission lines, the latter of which could be more likely since the recent approval of South Korea's power grid revision bill . South Korea reactors under construction GW Name Capacity Completion Saeul 3 1.4 Feb-26 Saeul 4 1.4 Nov-26 — Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power South Korea reactors due to expire by 2030 MW Name Start up Estimated end date Capacity Kori 4 1986 Aug-25 950 Wolsung 2 1997 Jun-27 700 Wolsung 3 1998 Jun-28 700 Wolsung 4 1999 Sep-29 700 Hanbit 1 1986 Aug-26 950 Hanbit 2 1987 May-27 950 Hanul 1 1988 Aug-28 950 Hanul 2 1989 Sep-29 950 — Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power 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