Tag: fossil

  • Another big Alaska fossil fuel project gets Biden team’s blessing

    Another big Alaska fossil fuel project gets Biden team’s blessing

    [ad_1]

    biden 30580

    “Alaska LNG is a carbon bomb 10 times the size of Willow,” said Lukas Ross, program manager at the environmental advocacy group Friends of the Earth. “By rubber-stamping projects like these, Joe Biden is putting his own climate legacy at risk.”

    The White House did not comment on questions about Alaska LNG. The administration has previously pointed to the major actions it has taken to tackle climate change, such as making major investments in clean energy and opening more public land to wind and solar energy projects.

    But while Biden has pledged to move the United States away from fossil fuels, the country’s role as the world’s top natural gas producer has become a bright spot for the U.S. economy and a lifeline for allies in Europe and Asia, especially amid the disruptions caused by Russia’s war on Ukraine. Biden’s State Department and his ambassador to Japan, Rahm Emanuel, are among the project’s supporters.

    “Look, I’ve been critical of the Biden administration on a whole host of issues,” Alaska Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan, who has pitched the project to foreign companies and governments, said in an interview. “But this even has the strong support of the Biden administration.”

    Government financing from last year’s landmark climate law and the 2021 infrastructure package have also improved the outlook for the plant, for instance by offering expanded tax credits for carbon-capture technology.

    The project, which still faces major economic challenges, would ship 3.5 billion cubic feet a day of liquefied natural gas produced in the state’s North Slope. Buyers in Japan, South Korea and elsewhere are giving the project a close look, people in the industry said.

    The momentum is a sharp change from 2019, when the company behind the project laid off half its staff and indefinitely delayed a final investment decision. At the time, the Trump administration’s steel tariffs and the trade war with major gas consumer China were creating uncertainty about the project’s future.

    Environmental groups point to estimates from the Energy Department that the project would spew the equivalent of 1.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere over its 30-year lifetime, even if it uses carbon capture technology. That’s akin to burning more than 8 million rail cars full of coal.

    Green groups say the administration’s approval of the Willow project and its breakneck pace of approving permits to drill for oil and gas on public land are in stark contrast to Biden’s own words.

    On Thursday, Biden pledged $1 billion to help developing countries fight climate change and renewed his call for more clean energy development.

    “We can keep the goal of limiting warming to just no more than 1.5 degrees,” Biden said at the 2023 Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate, a virtual gathering that included leaders of Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Australia and the European Union.

    Oregon Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley, who sits on the Senate Environment and Public Works and Foreign Relations committees, rebuked the Energy Department’s decision to approve a key permit for the Alaska gas project. The permit allows the project’s backers to ship gas to most countries around the world.

    “Another massive fossil project from a president who promised to drive the transition to renewables!” Merkley tweeted last month. “We have to lead by the power of our example—this is exactly the wrong example for the world!”

    The project’s backers say Alaska LNG would be one of the cleanest sources of natural gas. Wells in the North Slope already have enough natural gas to make new drilling unnecessary, and the carbon capture technology the project plans to use will help cut emissions, they said.

    The project as first proposed in 2012 always had a strategic appeal to investors. It would be close to Alaska’s mammoth natural gas reserves, and its location along the West Coast would significantly cut the shipping costs and time needed to transport U.S. natural gas to the Asian countries that are the biggest LNG market in the world.

    But what looked good as a blueprint never really penciled out in the ledger books, with its massive price tag deemed too large for investors. Especially daunting was the 800-mile pipeline that would be needed to transport the gas from Alaska’s North Slope to a liquefaction plant and export facility in Cook Inlet along that state’s southern coast. Alaska’s remote geography and brutal winters make any construction project more costly than it would be in the lower 48 states.

    A lot has changed in the past 18 months, however. Sullivan and fellow Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski included language in the bipartisan infrastructure law that made Alaska LNG eligible for billions of dollars in federal loan guarantees, Sullivan said. Then Democrats included a tax credit in the Inflation Reduction Act, H.R. 5376 (117), for carbon capture technology that Alaska LNG’s backers say could generate $600 million a year for the project.

    Meanwhile, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sent global energy markets into a tailspin. Japan, South Korea and European countries have scrambled to source alternative supplies of natural gas to replace what they have stopped taking from Russia. And with Alaska LNG being the only new, fully permitted gas export plant on the U.S. West Coast, Asian buyers in particular are giving the project a long look, said Frank Richards, senior vice president for project developer Alaska Gasline Development Corp.

    “Out of the calamity of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, we’ve seen a very positive increase of interest from buyers who don’t want to rely on adversarial countries for their energy supply,” Richards said in an interview. “Now those countries are seeing opportunities in Alaska LNG as a West Coast Pacific project.”

    “We’re poised to be ready to go to a final investment decision,” Richards added.

    Just as importantly, project backers say, State Department officials in the Biden administration have thrown their support behind the project.

    Emanuel, the former Chicago mayor and President Barack Obama’s former chief of staff, convened an Alaska LNG Summit in Tokyo in October that brought together project officials, State Department energy security coordinator Amos Hochstein and Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources Geoffrey Pyatt with representatives of Japan’s Ministry of Economics, Trade and Industry. Major Japanese gas-importing companies including JERA and Tokyo Gas also attended, Sullivan and Richards said.

    Also attending were representatives from investment bank Goldman Sachs, the Japan Bank for International Cooperation and private equity firm BlackRock, according to summaries of the meeting.

    Neither the White House nor State Department offered comment on the meeting. But in a December op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, Emanuel singled out Alaska LNG as a potential source for gas for Japan as the country seeks to reduce its use of coal. He is expected to discuss Alaska LNG at an energy conference in Anchorage next month, project backers said.

    “Alaska LNG can travel to Japan in six days without any strategic chokepoints and can make Japan the energy export hub for the Indo-Pacific to reduce its coal dependency,” Emanuel wrote in the newspaper.

    Sullivan, who said he helped organize the meeting with Emanuel, said the presence of the Biden official and Emanuel’s continued promotion of the project have helped ease foreign buyers’ fears that the Biden administration would abruptly kill the project.

    “Japan and Korea want to see that federal government support,” he said.

    Representatives of METI, the Japanese government agency in charge of setting energy policy, declined to comment on the meeting in Tokyo.

    While the reshaping of global energy markets amid the war in Ukraine and the political and financial help from the federal government have improved Alaska LNG’s prospects, high costs could still tank it, analysts warn.

    “Proximity to growing demand and resource depth make the project appealing, but complexity and cost create offsetting risks,” said Kevin Book, managing director of the consulting firm ClearView Energy. “And amid higher interest rates, bigger can be harder.”

    But the project’s backers and detractors both agree that Alaska LNG is much closer to the finish line now than it had been four years ago.

    “The State Department seems to be driving an agenda of exporting as much U.S.-produced methane gas as possible regardless of the climate impact,” said Alan Zibel, energy research director at progressive advocacy group Public Citizen. “The last thing the Biden administration should be doing is getting in bed with the oil and gas industry to export climate destroying methane gas.”



    [ad_2]
    #big #Alaska #fossil #fuel #project #Biden #teams #blessing
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • GOP’s climate counter punch: pushing more fossil fuels

    GOP’s climate counter punch: pushing more fossil fuels

    [ad_1]

    house passes lower energy costs act 64517

    But so far, the voters they’re hoping to attract don’t seem to care.

    The party’s early messaging promoting the bill amplifies attacks that fell flat for Republicans in the 2022 midterms. And new polling shared with POLITICO shows that the GOP’s legislative achievements aren’t energizing voters in some key states on the 2024 map, threatening their ambitions once again to win the Senate and White House.

    Most Republicans and independents — 59 and 66 percent, respectively — in Arizona, Montana, Nevada, Pennsylvania and West Virginia had heard nothing or little about efforts to speed up federal permitting of energy infrastructure projects, a centerpiece of Republicans’ agenda, according to a Public Opinion Strategies survey of 1,200 registered voters.

    Building America’s Future, a lobbying effort that supports the permitting changes, paid for the polling. The group is backed by GOP operatives with ties to former Vice President Mike Pence and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

    Republicans, however, have faith in the message, even as they acknowledge the difficulty in translating energy permitting into campaign trail slogans.

    “It’s resonating,” Rep. John Curtis (R-Utah) said of the Republican energy agenda. “You can’t take a subject as complex as energy and try to message every little nuance.”

    The GOP is using increasingly aggressive tactics to back up its bet that Americans will back its message. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy tied the fate of a debt limit increase to H.R. 1, raising the stakes of negotiations that Biden administration officials warn could lead to economic catastrophe.

    Democrats, however, were skeptical that the GOP plan would succeed.

    “I don’t think Republicans are going to get very far on this,” said Rep. Ro Khanna. “People want a government that works, they want to build things. That’s way down in the weeds.”

    The House energy bill, which the lower chamber passed last month with near-unanimous Republican support and votes from four Democrats, aims to expand oil and gas drilling and exports, ease the environmental permitting review process, and repeal many of the $369 billion of climate and clean energy incentives enacted in Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act.

    Targeting those IRA measures could present risks to the GOP, however: Companies have announced at least $243 billion in investments in battery plants, electric vehicles factories and other green energy projects since Biden signed the law in August. And the vast majority of those projects are set to be built in red districts, according to analyses by POLITICO and Climate Power, an environmental organization paid media operation.

    But when pollsters frame the GOP’s energy and permitting proposals as efforts to fight inflation, the ideas fared much better with voters, the survey showed. Seventy-one percent were more likely — including 38 percent who were “much more likely” — to back permitting changes when told they would lower grocery, gasoline and power bills.

    That gives Republicans hope that their broader strategy might gain traction.

    “It’s impossible to make permitting a relevant issue unless you’re focused on how does it impact American families directly,” said Ron Bonjean, a GOP strategist and co-founder and partner of bipartisan public affairs and communications firm ROKK Solutions. “This is not just placing a gambling bet on whether energy prices will be higher or lower at the time of the election … This is showing a solution.”

    It’s not hard to see why Republicans would want to focus on energy. The party’s unity on the issue stands in contrast to other flashpoints like abortion, where Republicans have struggled to align on navigating a debate that has energized Democratic voters. And while inflation has moderated in the past few months, it remains a top worry for voters.

    “Would you rather pay more at the pump or less at the pump? Would you rather have a lower utility bill or a higher utility bill? Would you rather pay more for heating oil or less for heating oil?” Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said of Republicans’ credo. “I don’t know how to wordsmith that, but it’s something along those lines.”

    The National Republican Congressional Committee plans to use Democrats’ votes against H.R. 1 as a primary line of attack in frontline House districts where voters might lean more moderately and be open to Republicans’ focus on inflation.

    On April 17, the NRCC sent out a memo hitting Democratic Reps. Gabe Vasquez of New Mexico, Mary Peltola of Alaska and Yadira Caraveo of Colorado for voting against the bill, calling their opposition “likely the beginning of the end of their reelection campaign” given the size of their states’ oil and gas industries.

    The NRCC slammed 12 House Democrats when the bill passed in March, saying they “chose the extreme left” in opposing the legislation while citing how much energy and gas costs had risen under Biden.

    Outside groups aligned with Republicans are pouring money into efforts to turn energy policy into a national campaign liability for Democrats. American Action Network, a 501(c)(4) group that is allowed to promote issues without disclosing donors, ran advertisements in Democratic swing districts urging them to vote for H.R. 1. Two such Democrats — Reps. Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez of Washington and Jared Golden of Maine — backed the bill.

    Republicans believe their energy message answers voters’ kitchen table concerns and will appeal to the independents and moderates they will need to win the White House and Senate. Relaxing permitting rules will help both clean energy and fossil fuels, they contend, and they say their legislation will ease pressure on global oil and gas markets while thwarting rivals like China and Russia.

    “Whether it wins elections or not, this is something that we truly need to focus on for our constituencies,” Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) said.

    Still, even though the House passed the H.R. 1, dubbed the Lower Energy Costs Act, Republicans are a long way from enacting the measures, which need to pass in the Democratically controlled Senate.

    And a focus on energy prices didn’t fare well in the 2022 midterm elections, even in a year when gasoline prices hit all-time highs and home heating costs surged. Those early year price spikes had moderated by the time voters went to the polls, and are even lower now.

    That pullback in prices may have helped turn the anticipated red wave at the ballot box into a red ripple, giving the Republicans a thin majority in the House and keeping the Senate in Democrats’ hands.

    Ernst defended the focus on energy prices last year, and blamed the poor Republican election result instead on weak candidates, many of whom embraced former President Donald Trump’s baseless claims about the 2020 election.

    Democrats maintain that Republicans are presenting a feeble and incoherent agenda, not least because GOP lawmakers have championed various portions of their package. Some have touted the permitting aspect, which they note would help speed development of all types of energy sources — both fossil fuel projects as well as the clean energy projects that Democrats prefer.

    Others, such as House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, have focused on their bill’s goal to spur more oil and gas production — enabling Democrats to make the case that the GOP plan benefits a fossil fuel industry that overwhelmingly donates to Republican candidates.

    “That bill is fundamentally a message bill they are trying to use to set up this fake argument that the reason energy prices are going up is because of something that we’ve done,” Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) said in an interview. She added, “In fact, the reason energy prices have gone up is because the big oil companies don’t want to invest like they used to want to invest because they know the tide has turned when it comes to investors.”

    Republicans contend the wide array of policy issues in the 207-page bill benefits their members, allowing them to tailor its message to their own districts.

    “You can argue, ‘Y’all need to be more concise.’ But because energy is so pervasive, it does affect inflation — this helps those families who’ve been pushed into poverty,” Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.) said.

    “It does affect grocery prices,” he said. “This does create better job opportunities in the United States. This does resist China and helps to put us in a stronger position. So it does solve a lot of different things.”

    And if gasoline prices shoot up again, that could make voters more receptive to Republicans’ call to increase oil and gas production. An April Gallup survey showed a 14-percentage-point jump since 2018 in the number of Americans who believe that national policies should encourage more oil and gas drilling. Thirty-five percent supported that position this time.

    Even that, though, doesn’t represent a clear win for Republicans: A majority of Americans — 59 percent — still believe national policies should place a priority on alternative energy instead of oil and gas, according to the Gallup poll.

    That included 62 percent of independents, the type of voters Republicans want to pull to win the White House and pivotal congressional races. And fewer Americans said they see the energy situation as “very serious” than one year ago — 44 percent then versus 34 percent now.

    Brittany Gibson contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]
    #GOPs #climate #counter #punch #pushing #fossil #fuels
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Experts for preservation of fossil sites in Kashmir

    Experts for preservation of fossil sites in Kashmir

    [ad_1]

    Jahangeer Ganaie

    Srinagar, Mar 29: Experts and people in Kashmir have urged government to take steps for preservation of fossil sites and use them for promotion of tourism.

    Mudasir Ahmad a geology expert and vocational trainer from Kulgam told news agency—Kashmir News Observer (KNO) that tourists rarely visit Aherbal and other sites during lean season but these fossil sites can be promoted as alternate ourist destinations.

    “There is need to conserve these fossil sites as these sites are potential resources in every respect and every organization must come forward to preserve them,” he said.

    Gulam Ahmad another expert told KNO that fossil sites are very rare but fortunately few sites were discovered in Kulgam district recently and there is a need to preserve them.

    He said that the government must take cognizance at the earliest and take immediate steps for its preservation and promotion as it will help us in getting more resources.

    Experts said that the sites can be preserved with a little care and they can provide a lot of information about our rich geological past to the future generations.

    They emphasised the need to protect and preserve the rich geo heritage by educating the community and locals about the need and significance of preserving them.

    People in Kulgam area have also demanded that fossil sites that were discovered last year must be preserved and promoted as tourist sites. The sites are at Noorabad in Kulgam.

    Kashmir is rich in fossils that date back millions of years.

    Mushtaq Ahmad Beigh, Deputy Director Archives, Archaeology and Museum, Srinagar told KNO steps are being taken for the preservation of fossil sites.

    He said department along with tourism department is planning to establish at site museum in Aherbal area in Kulgam to promote and boost tourism sector as well.

    He said that Kulgam where fossil sites were discovered are in snow bound area and every possible step will taken for preservation of fossil sites as site plan and markings have been already done.

    [ad_2]
    #Experts #preservation #fossil #sites #Kashmir

    ( With inputs from : roshankashmir.net )

  • Colombia announces halt on fossil fuel exploration for a greener economy

    Colombia announces halt on fossil fuel exploration for a greener economy

    [ad_1]

    Colombia’s leftwing government has announced that it will not approve any new oil and gas exploration projects as it seeks to shift away from fossil fuels and toward a new sustainable economy.

    Irene Vélez, the minister for mines told world leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos that the time had come for the Andean nation to move away from its reliance on oil and gas and begin a new, greener chapter in the country’s history.

    “We have decided not to award new oil and gas exploration contracts, and while that has been very controversial, it’s a clear sign of our commitment in the fight against climate change,” Vélez said during a panel in Davos on Thursday. “This decision is absolutely urgent and needs immediate action.”

    Colombia’s president, Gustavo Petro, made ending the country’s long history of economic reliance on oil a key part of his campaign before becoming the country’s first leftist leader in August last year.

    But a fractured congress, increasingly bleak economic outlook and a series of policy U-turns from the government have put Petro’s ambitious environmentally friendly pledge in doubt.

    The country’s finance minister, José Ocampo, has stepped in on several occasions to contradict government ministers and reassure financial markets after their comments sent the value of the Colombian peso tumbling.

    Ocampo has repeatedly told reporters that the country remains open to new oil and gas projects as it relies heavily on the sector’s revenue.

    But Petro backed Vélez’s announcement this week, saying that alternative economies would make up the loss from oil, which accounts for around half of all of Colombia’s total export revenue.

    “We are convinced that strong investment in tourism, given the beauty of the country, and the capacity and potential that the country has to generate clean energy, could, in the short term, perfectly fill the void left by fossil fuels,” Petro told reporters in Davos.

    Vélez’s doubling down on the policy has been met with criticism from economic analysts who say that halting oil exploration will not affect the global demand for fossil fuels while hurting Colombia’s economy.

    Colombia should transition toward clean energy but without “killing its golden-egg-laying goose”, Julio César Vera, former president of the Colombian Association of Petroleum Engineers, told Colombian media.

    The policy has also been criticised by environmental experts who say the move does not address the country’s key environmental issues, such as cattle-ranching and unsustainable agriculture which are driving deforestation in the Amazon rainforest, nor will it have any significant effect on the global climate crisis.

    “Colombia must not sacrifice its economic growth to make itself the champion of energy transition in Latin America,” said Manuel Rodríguez, who in 1991 became the country’s first environment minister.

    “This is a childish and populist idea based on a false narrative because according to the studies, we will lose several points of GDP while making next to no effect on the global consumption of fossil fuels. Another oil-producing country will simply make up for Colombia’s shortfall.”



    [ad_2]
    #Colombia #announces #halt #fossil #fuel #exploration #greener #economy
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )