US scraps legal protections for migratory birds

: Crude oil, Emissions, Natural gas
21/01/05

President Donald Trump's administration has finalized a rule that will allow oil companies, wind farm owners and other industries to kill an unlimited number of migratory birds without facing any federal penalties.

The new rule, published today, would re-interpret the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 so that the government could only seek penalties for the illegal hunting of birds, rather than unintentional deaths from industrial activity. The change will save oil producers and other industries money by allowing them to abandon best practices to avoid bird deaths, such as covering open-air oil pits with nets, the US Fish and Wildlife Service said in a study published in November.

The rule is one of the last industry-friendly changes to environmental laws the Trump administration is pushing through in its last weeks in office. If the new policy had been in place in 2010, BP could have avoided paying $100mn in fines for the large numbers of birds killed in the wake of the the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

Oil producers feel they have been unfairly targeted under the law, since most migratory bird deaths are caused by buildings and electrical lines. Power lines kill more than 31mn birds each year, while oil pits kill 750,000 and wind turbines kill 230,000. Wildlife officials only investigate about 57 cases each year and prosecute only some of those, according to federal data, typically in cases where birds are killed multiple times at the same location.

The final rule will not go into effect for 30 days, well after president-elect Joe Biden is sworn into office on 20 January. Biden last month vowed to halt or delay "midnight regulations" that have not already taken effect. That would offer a chance for the Biden administration to start legal efforts to stop the regulatory change from taking effect.

A federal judge last year already threw out the Trump administration's first attempt to re-interpret the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, after finding there was "nothing" in the text of the law to suggest the Trump administration's new interpretation was correct. That could offer grounds for activists to challenge the rule in court. The US Congress could also vote to scrap the rule, under a law named the Congressional Review Act, if there is support from a majority of members in the US Senate and the US House of Representatives.

By Chris Knight

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.

24/11/05

Carbon markets have ‘fallen short’ for LDCs: UNCTAD

London, 5 November (Argus) — Carbon markets so far have not delivered meaningful climate finance to least developed countries (LDCs), according to a report by the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), although the mechanisms under Article 6 of the Paris climate agreement present improved prospects. "Fragmented" carbon markets have "fallen short" on providing climate finance to LDCs, increasing climate change mitigation, and supporting the structural transformation of these countries, UNCTAD said. Carbon credit prices are not high enough to incentivise projects, the report warns, and if they hold at about $10/t CO2, about 97pc of LDC mitigation potential will remain unharnessed by mid-century. Participation in the voluntary carbon market (VCM) and the UN's clean development mechanism (CDM) has also been concentrated in few LDC countries. About 75pc of carbon credits from LDC-based projects in the VCM come from just six countries — Bangladesh, Cambodia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Malawi, Uganda and Zambia — while 80pc of CDM credits come from six countries, four of which also figure in the VCM's areas of concentration — Bangladesh, Cambodia, Malawi, Myanmar, Nepal and Uganda. And the limited inclusion of carbon offset credits in most compliance markets means they "do not offer meaningful entry points" for LDCs, UNCTAD said. "The outlook may improve" as markets at the UN level shift to new mechanisms under Article 6 of the Paris deal, UNCTAD said, as parties can apply the lessons learned from the CDM to create an improved system — efforts for which have been evidenced by the "prolonged negotiations" on Article 6 rules, which will continue at the UN's Cop 29 climate conference kicking off in Baku, Azerbaijan, next week. The success of these mechanisms will rely on "decisive action" by LDCs to determine how to approach their participation to ensure it supports their development goals, the report found. And UNCTAD called on the international community to standardise carbon market rules to reduce fragmentation and simplify access for LDCs, as well as to allow them to participate in compliance markets. But carbon markets are just one tool, UNCTAD emphasised, and not a substitute for other forms of climate finance. This will be a key topic at Cop 29, as parties attempt to decide on a new collective quantified goal to replace the existing $100bn/yr commitment pledged by developed countries. By Victoria Hatherick Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Voting set to conclude in race for White House

24/11/05

Voting set to conclude in race for White House

Washington, 5 November (Argus) — Voting concludes today in the US presidential contest between former president Donald Trump and vice president Kamala Harris, a race with high stakes for energy policy, trade and climate change. Polls will close by 6-9pm ET in eastern states and by 11 pm ET in most western states, but election officials say it will take time to count votes, including from mail-in ballots that will trickle in over the coming days. As of 3 November, voters who went to the polling stations early or sent mail-in ballots added up to 48pc of the total turnout in 2020, according to analysis by the Washington Post. The presidential race is likely to be determined by voters in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona and Nevada, where pre-election polls have shown no decisive lead for Harris or Trump. Voters are casting ballots at a time when domestic oil and gas production is booming. US crude output reached a record high 13mn b/d last year, while gas production hit a record 103 Bcf/d, according to the US Energy Information Administration. Despite record production and profits in the oil industry, Trump has focused heavily on energy policy — and voter anger over higher prices across the economy — in his bid to win a second term. US drivers paid an average of $3.07/USG for regular grade gasoline in the week ended on 4 November, the lowest price in 10 months — but still higher than at any point during Trump's first presidency. On the campaign trail, Trump has assured oil and gas producers that under his watch they would be permitted to "drill, baby, drill" and has promised to dismantle the energy tax credits in President Joe Biden's signature climate initiative, the Inflation Reduction Act. Harris has committed to support the 2022 law and other energy policies adopted by Biden, including continued support for electric vehicles. Harris has disavowed her 2019 pledge to ban hydraulic fracturing. But oil and gas firms remain concerned about restrictions on federal leasing and efforts to electrify the vehicle fleet if she is elected. The next president will decide key questions on energy policy, such as how to proceed with a "pause" on the licensing of new US LNG export facilities and to manage climate-related rules for power plants, oil and gas facilities and vehicles. The race for the White House will have equally high stakes for companies involved in metals and agriculture , as well as other commodities. Trump is planning a combative approach to trade, with a 20pc tariff on all foreign imports and even higher tariffs against China, and to rescind many regulations. In 2025, the US Congress is poised for a major fight on tax policy because of the year-end expiration of an estimated $4 trillion in tax cuts. Russia's war on Ukraine, and the future of US restrictions on Russian energy exports is also at stake during the election. Trump has vowed to end the war by forcing Kyiv to negotiate a deal with Russian president Vladimir Putin and appears to back the Kremlin's argument that the continuation of US sanctions on Russia would weaken and undermine the dollar. A Harris administration would continue enforcing the G7 price cap on Russian oil exports and, possibly, add to the restrictions on Moscow's earnings from its oil and gas exports. The growing threat of an Israel-Iran war and its potential impacts on oil flows from the Middle East is threatening to overwhelm the final months of Biden's term in office and any foreign policy initiatives either candidate vying to succeed him will pursue in the region. US-China relations are likely to remain adversarial in coming years. Viewing Beijing as the principal economic and geopolitical challenge for the US is a rare overlap in foreign policy priorities identified by Trump and Harris. Of particular concern in Washington is the ability of oil exporting countries such as Iran, Venezuela and Russia to find willing buyers for their crude in China despite US sanctions. Polls also show a tight race in the fight for control of the US House of Representatives, where Republicans hold a slim 220-212 majority. Up to 22 congressional races are up to grabs, with a range of potential outcomes favoring either party, election ratings firm Cook Political Report says. Cook rates 208 seats as solid or leaning Republican, and 205 solid or leaning Democratic, with both shy of the 218 needed for control of the chamber. In the US Senate, where Democrats hold a 51-49 majority, Republicans have a clear path to taking control because of polling leads in West Virginia and Montana. Republicans could win control of the Senate by flipping just one seat, if Trump wins the election, but would need to flip two seats if Harris wins. By Chris Knight and Haik Gugarats Presidential race still a toss-up Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US railroad-labor contract talks heat up

24/11/04

US railroad-labor contract talks heat up

Washington, 4 November (Argus) — Negotiations to amend US rail labor contracts are becoming increasingly complicated as railroads split on negotiating tactics, potentially stalling operations at some carriers. The multiple negotiating pathways are reigniting fears of 2022, when some unions agreed to new contracts and others were on the verge of striking before President Joe Biden ordered them back to work . Shippers feared freight delays if strikes occurred. This round, two railroads are independently negotiating with unions. Most of the Class I railroads have traditionally used the National Carriers' Conference Committee to jointly negotiate contracts with the nation's largest labor unions. Eastern railroad CSX has already reached agreements with labor unions representing 17 job categories, which combined represent nearly 60pc of its unionized workforce. "This is the right approach for CSX," chief executive Joe Hinrichs said last month. Getting the national agreements on wages and benefits done will then let CSX work with employees on efficiency, safety and other issues, he said. Western carrier Union Pacific is taking a similar path. "We look forward to negotiating a deal that improves operating efficiency, helps provide the service we sold to our customers" and enables the railroad to thrive, it said. Some talks may be tough. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) and Union Pacific are in court over their most recent agreement. But BLET is meeting with Union Pacific chief executive Jim Vena next week, and with CSX officials the following week. Traditional group negotiation is also proceeding. BNSF, Norfolk Southern and the US arm of Canadian National last week initiated talks under the National Carriers' Conference Committee to amend existing contracts with 12 unions. Under the Railway Labor Act, rail labor contracts do not expire, a regulation designed to keep freight moving. But if railroads and unions again go months without reaching agreements, freight movements will again be at risk. By Abby Caplan Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Trump unlikely to fully end US clean energy policies

24/11/04

Trump unlikely to fully end US clean energy policies

Houston, 4 November (Argus) — Although former US president Donald Trump has promised to end climate policies enacted during the administration of President Joe Biden, the political complications of reversing course make a full change of direction unlikely should Trump return to the White House. Trump has frequently criticized Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), promising to terminate the " Green New Scam " and rescind all unspent funds in the Biden administration's climate policy suite, if he is elected to a second term. But fulfilling that pledge may be difficult for many reasons, not least of which is whether Republicans have control of both chambers of Congress after Tuesday's election, including the unlikely outcome of a 60-seat majority needed to bypass a Senate filibuster. Beyond the math, Republican districts are benefiting from IRA funding, with some lawmakers from Trump's party already opposing the turmoil that could arise from an about-face on tax policy. "There's no way they're going to be able to replace and repeal the IRA, in large part because so many of the dollars are flowing to [Republican] states," said David Shepheard, a partner at consultant Baringa who specializes in energy and resources. "I think the pieces of the IRA that are most at risk are the [electric vehicle] tax credits, potentially some of the stimulative pieces around offshore wind." The IRA established a host of federal incentives to support clean electricity growth and the associated domestic supply chain. Those include technology-agnostic production and investment tax credits for electricity generators based on their emissions intensities. But the law went well beyond the power sector and also established credits for hydrogen production, electric vehicles and the manufacture of components needed by clean electricity systems. Project developers are counting on a policy trajectory that does not match Trump's rhetoric, which would allow some incentives to stay on the books. Companies expect market forces, such as corporate demand, and state mandates to continue to drive growth for solar and onshore wind and energy storage, rather than national politics. But there is more trepidation around offshore wind, a less mature sector for which the federal government is effectively the landlord for project sites. "There is no doubt that the trajectory of the US offshore wind industry will be impacted by the November election," Liz Burdock, chief executive of offshore wind industry group Oceantic Network, said. "Its outcome will influence how we maintain our momentum." Uncertainty around the US presidential election has dampened private investment in the sector this year, according to Oceantic. At the same time, companies say the industry has come a long way since 2016, with a handful of projects now operating, while recent macroeconomic challenges are subsiding. Furthermore, demand for offshore wind would continue at the state level, and these factors could make the industry more resilient to headwinds. Executive decisions Trump still could use the executive branch to "stonewall" sectors helped by the IRA in the absence of a repeal, including by influence the timing or distribution of IRA funds, according to Shepheard. He could shift regulators' priorities to new oil and gas development, which, along with other actions, could make resources such as combined-cycle natural gas plants more attractive than renewables. "The extent that renewables and other cleaner energy assets are competing with gas, that'll be the big change from a Trump administration," Shepheard said. At the same time, funding for onshore wind and solar is "relatively safe", and tax credits for hydrogen and carbon capture are on comparably firm ground because of support from the oil and gas industry, Shepheard said. Some companies have expressed cautious optimism that some elements of the IRA, such as the advanced manufacturing tax credit, will survive. The incentive is not only important for the solar supply chain but also offshore wind, as state-level solicitations often require developers to invest in local manufacturing. Republican states in the US southeast have already benefited from new factories springing up on the back of the credits. For example, Enel chose Oklahoma for a new new module plant , First Solar located a factory in Alabama and Qcells has expanded production in Georgia. Moreover, removing that carrot could leave the US solar industry reliant on Chinese companies, which could run afoul of Trump's protectionist trade instincts. Trump's campaign did not respond to multiple requests to elaborate on his policy plans. By Patrick Zemanek Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Canada advances oil and gas GHG cap

24/11/04

Canada advances oil and gas GHG cap

Houston, 4 November (Argus) — Canada is proposing to use a cap-and-trade system to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from its oil and gas sector, a long-promised but politically contentious move. The proposed program aims to reduce emissions from the sector by 35pc, compared to 2019 levels, by 2030-32, according to a draft rule published by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) on Monday. It would cover upstream production activities, both onshore and offshore, including for oil, natural gas and liquified natural gas. After an initial four-year phase-in over 2026-29, entities would then need to meet their emissions obligations over the first 2030-2032 compliance period. While all operators must report emissions, only those producing more than 365,000 b/yr of oil equivalent, equal roughly to 99pc of upstream emissions, would be covered by the trading program. Covered entities would receive free allowance allocations, which would decline in line with their emissions cap. Companies could also buy allowances on the secondary market if needed, use carbon offsets or contribute funds to a decarbonization program. The first three-year compliance period of 2030-31, would be set at 27pc below emissions reported for 2026, which ECCC said would be equivalent to the 35pc target. The federal program will not link with the California-Quebec joint carbon market, known as the Western Climate Initiative, regulators said. ECCC officials stressed that the resulting program would cap emissions, not production, for Canadian oil producers, pushing back at a common criticism from opponents. The federal move will keep the industry accountable to its own promise of net-zero by 2050 and result in a greener and more competitive industry, said Canada Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson. "As the world moves to reduce emissions generated by the production and combustion of fossil fuels, oil and gas extracted with the lowest production of emissions will have value in the world," Wilkinson said. But Alberta premier Danielle Smith claimed on Monday that the proposed program violates Canada's constitution. Provinces have exclusive authority over non-renewable natural resource development and the proposal ignores ongoing projects in the province, such as the Pathways Alliance, she said. Canadian Natural Resources, Cenovus, ConocoPhillips Canada, Imperial, MEG Energy and Suncor Energy are involved in the project. The program is a cap on production and will cost the province "anywhere from C$3bn-$7bn ($2.1-5bn)/yr" in absent royalty payments because of a loss of 1mn b/d in production, Smith said, promising future legal challenges against the federal government. "The only way to achieve these unrealistic targets is to shut in our production, I know it, they know it. We are calling them out on it, and they have to stop it," she said. Canada, a major net exporter of oil, has committed to reducing emissions by 40-45pc, compared to 2005 levels, by 2030 and net-zero by 2050. But emissions from the country's oil and gas sector remain an obstacle to meeting those goals. The sector accounts for 31pc, or 217mn metric tonnes, of the country's emissions in 2022 , according to the most recent federal data. Emissions from this sector increased by 83pc from 1990 to 2022. Over the past year Canada's federal government has focused on competitive climate change-related policies, from rolling out investment tax credits for decarbonization technologies to enforcement of the government's new Clean Fuel Regulations. But the road for the Liberal Party-led government to meet the climate goals remains a rocky one ahead of a federal election that must take place no later than October 2025. In September, the Conservative Party, led by Pierre Poilievre, attempted a no confidence measure on prime minister Justin Trudeau's government, fed by discontent around the federal carbon tax. While the motion failed, it highlights the balancing act for the Liberal Party ahead of the election. Trudeau has resisted calls from within his party to cede the field as his popularity waned, to the benefit of Poilievre. ECCC plans to request public comment on the proposal through 8 January 2025 and estimates it will finalize the regulations next year. By Denise Cathey Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. 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