Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine and get Washington Briefing: politics and policy stories that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!
BP’S NEW NET-ZERO EMISSIONS TARGET RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT ITS NEAR-TERM PLANS: With its new net-zero target, BP is charting a course to fundamentally change its operations by mid-century. But the true test of its pledge, especially in the near term, will be whether, how strongly, and how specifically the oil major advocates for policies that slash greenhouse gas emissions.
“Let me be very clear today: I get it,” BP’s new CEO Bernard Looney said Wednesday, announcing the new target. “The world does have a carbon budget, it is finite, and it is running out fast, and we need a rapid transition to net-zero.”
BP is pledging net-zero emissions across its operations and within its oil and gas production by 2050 at the latest, as well as halving the carbon intensity of the products it sells. It’s also promising to measure methane at all of its oil and gas processing sites by 2023 — the one specific near-term target in its plans.
And BP — the company that just a couple years ago spent millions to kill a carbon tax in Washington state — is also saying it will “more actively” advocate for net-zero policies, including carbon pricing. Looney said BP will leave trade groups that don’t support climate policy.
Talk is cheap: The big question is: Will they actually do it?
BP has already switched its position on carbon pricing in Washington. Earlier this year, the oil giant publicly backed legislation in the state that would set up a cap-and-trade program, saying such programs “embody the principles that create investment opportunities and encourage the right behaviors.”
Some energy analysts, though, say BP now has a really good reason to advocate for stronger public policy curbing emissions. The oil company has raised the stakes for itself.
“For this to work for BP economically, assuming they match pledges with real action, it now NEEDS policy to follow to actually change the trajectory of oil and gas demand globally,” said Jason Bordoff, director of Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy.
Looney, during remarks Wednesday, said BP intends to “lay down the law” on its lobbying, to ensure all country-specific divisions are speaking with the same voice.
“If anyone sees BP acting counter to what I say here today, I want to hear about it,” Looney said.
Welcome to Daily on Energy, written by Washington Examiner Energy and Environment Writers Josh Siegel (@SiegelScribe) and Abby Smith (@AbbySmithDC). Email [email protected] or [email protected] for tips, suggestions, calendar items, and anything else. If a friend sent this to you and you’d like to sign up, click here. If signing up doesn’t work, shoot us an email, and we’ll add you to our list.
HOUSE REPUBLICANS UNVEIL CLIMATE PLAN FOCUSED ON CARBON CAPTURE: House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy and allies formally presented the first plank of an agenda to address climate change Wednesday, focused on using trees and technology to capture carbon emissions.
The Republican presented four bills as part of their proposal, a mix of new and old legislation that has been already introduced.
“The one thing that unites all is we want a cleaner, safer, and healthier environment,” McCarthy said in a briefing for reporters. “The ingenuity we have with technology [is] able to make that all happen.”
The carbon capture package includes a bill, formally introduced Wednesday, for the U.S. to work toward a global goal of planting a trillion trees. It also features an expansion of a tax break approved by Congress in 2018 and signed by President Trump for companies that use carbon capture technology to trap carbon from fossil fuel or industrial plants. The new bill would make the so-called 45Q tax credit permanent, increasing the amount paid to companies, and lowering the threshold of captured carbon to qualify for it.
SENATE DEMOCRATS AIM TO EMPOWER EPA ON CLIMATE: They say their new bill, targeting net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, would allow the Environmental Protection Agency to do the job it’s been held back from in this administration: addressing climate change.
There’s just one problem: It’s unlikely Trump would sign the bill into law, and Senate Republicans won’t be rushing to support legislation that hands the EPA the reins on climate policy.
“EPA has the tools in their toolbox,” said Senator Tom Carper of Delaware, the lead sponsor on the bill and top Democrat on the environment committee. Nearly three dozen Democrats, including Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, joined him on the bill. “I want them to hear loud and clear a voice from Congress … that this is your job.” Carper said he is optimistic some Republicans will ultimately join the call.
The bill doesn’t mandate any specific policies: It directs the EPA administrator to draft a climate plan and then implement it via existing authorities.
That means it wouldn’t directly price carbon, which many economists, analysts and even some businesses say would be the most effective way to cut emissions. Carper, though, isn’t ruling out a carbon price in the future.
“I think ultimately the idea of putting a price on carbon is a really smart way to do this,” Carper said. “But what are we going to do in the meantime?”
HOW CLIMATE FARED IN NEW HAMPSHIRE’S EXIT POLLS: Climate change ranked second as the most important issue for Granite State Democratic voters, topped only by healthcare, according to exit polls.
It’s the second indication this cycle that more Democratic primary voters are prioritizing climate change as they weigh which candidate to support. The issue also ranked second, just behind healthcare, among Iowa caucusgoers last week.
Climate voters for Mayor Pete? Although Bernie Sanders claimed victory last night, it was former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg who won over the most climate voters.
Buttigieg received the votes of 30% of those who said climate change was their number one issue, according to analysis of exit polls by the Washington Post. Sanders came in second at 22%. It was a rough night for Joe Biden, overall and among climate voters, with just 6% backing the former vice president.
2020 RACE LOSES NUCLEAR ADVOCATE ANDREW YANG: The presidential race lost another leading proponent of nuclear power with the exit of Andrew Yang on Tuesday. Yang was specifically enthusiastic about advanced reactors, promising to invest $50 billion in “the next generation of safe, clean nuclear power.” He was not shy about calling out competitors skeptical of nuclear, like Sanders.
“I do not know why other candidates are shying away from nuclear,” Yang said at a climate town hall at Georgetown University in September. “Maybe they’re just not as forward-thinking.” Yang also supported a carbon tax and dividend, because of its backing from the oil and gas industry, and he was a fan of planting trees to absorb carbon, which he said is more “plausible” than creating “a new carbon capture facility every hour.”
Michael Bennet, a centrist Colorado senator who also dropped out Tuesday, was a quieter figure in the race, given his low polling and failure to qualify for recent debates. He was perhaps best known in climate circles for his proposal establishing a national “commitment” to conserve 30% of America’s lands and oceans by 2030.
EPA CONFIRMS US EMISSIONS ROSE IN 2018: Greenhouse gas emissions increased nearly 3% between 2017 and 2018, driven mostly by greater burning of fossil fuels, according to the EPA’s draft inventory released Wednesday. Transportation again topped electric power as the largest-emitting sector of the economy.
CHATTERJEE DEFENDS ORDER COMBATING STATE CLEAN ENERGY POLICIES: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chairman Neil Chatterjee said Tuesday that the panel’s controversial proposed order targeting state-issued clean energy subsidies is not demonstrative of hostility to “cooperative federalism.”
“I don’t think it’s fair to say carte blanche we are overriding state authority,” Chatterjee, a Republican, said during a press conference at the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners Winter Policy Summit.
What FERC’s doing: The changes, backed by FERC’s two Republicans, are designed to raise payments to non-subsidized sources of energy in the PJM power market — primarily coal and gas plants — by setting a price floor for new generation resources to combat below-cost bids from subsidized renewable and nuclear sources. Chatterjee argued inaction by FERC could lead to the “demise” of wholesale capacity markets. He expressed confidence the order could withstand legal scrutiny despite PJM itself calling on FERC to rewrite portions of it.
PJM Executive Director Asim Haque, appearing at the summit Monday, said, “in the long term, we don’t believe this is a durable solution,” warning that some states that subsidize clean energy could decide to remove their power sectors from PJM, creating inefficiencies in the market.
Chatterjee said Tuesday he did not think states would flee PJM or other markets.
“When folks do the analysis and see the benefits of participation in organized markets, I would think a state would have to think twice about losing the benefits their consumers enjoy from participation in these organized markets,” he said.
MCNAMEE LOSS WON’T CAUSE FERC TO LOSE QUORUM: Chatterjee also assured that Republican Commissioner Bernard McNamee’s recent decision to not seek another term won’t cause FERC to lose quorum, and unable to do normal business.
“He has committed not just to me, but to stakeholders, that he will not leave us without a quorum,” Chatterjee said. “I am not anticipating a lack of quorum at any point.”
McNamee’s departure could leave FERC with only two sitting commissioners — Chatterjee and Richard Glick, a Democrat — and thus unable to do regular business.
But the nomination of Republican James Danly is currently pending before the Senate, and Chatterjee said he expects him to be confirmed before McName leaves.
McNamee’s term ends at the end of June, but he can serve through the end of the year.
VINEYARD WIND CONFIRMS DELAY DUE TO SLOW PERMITTING BY TRUMP: America’s first major offshore wind project won’t finish construction on schedule because of permitting delays overseen by the Trump administration.
The Vineyard Wind project planned off Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts “is no longer expected” to become operational by 2022, the project’s CEO Lars Pedersen said in a statement Tuesday.
He was reacting to an updated timeline for permitting released last week by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management that said the agency won’t conclude a final environmental impact statement for Vineyard Wind until December of this year.
The Trump administration had already delivered a setback to Vineyard Wind last August, when BOEM ordered a supplemental review for the project to consider the potential impact on commercial fishing. The agency also decided to wrap its Vineyard Wind review into a broader study on the cumulative impact of offshore wind projects planned off the East Coast.
SOLAR INDUSTRY OUTLOOK NOT BRIGHTER FROM TRUMP’S TARIFFS: The White House’s tariffs, meant to boost the domestic solar panel industry, haven’t benefited most companies, who say they would rather the administration get rid of the levies instead.
The International Trade Commission, a federal agency, reported on Friday that the tariffs of up to 30% placed on the imports of panels and the key components of panels two years ago had not prevented imports from rising or domestic companies from going out of business.
The report found that some major U.S. solar cell producers had ceased production, leading to declines in domestic production and capacity. Makers of finished solar panels had declined initially, then showed some recent improvements, but their overall record was mixed.
Read more from this story by Washington Examiner trade reporter Sean Higgins.
EPA ACCUSED OF HANDCUFFING SCIENCE ADVISORS: House Science Committee Chairwoman Eddie Bernice Johnson says a new EPA policy would all but guarantee the agency’s science advisers have little say in its rulemaking process.
Under the guidance in question, the EPA would meet monthly with the Science Advisory Board chair to determine which rulemakings it would make sense for the full board of independent scientific advisers to review. That adds an extra step in the process, rather than allowing all of the board members to weigh in on whether a review is appropriate.
Johnson, in a letter to EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler on Tuesday, is suggesting the EPA’s new policy is political retaliation after the SAB raised questions about whether a number of the Trump administration’s most important rollbacks of Obama-era climate, air, and water rules were scientifically sound.
BIPARTISAN ENERGY EFFICIENCY BILL WOULD PACK A MAJOR EMISSIONS PUNCH: Legislation encouraging less energy use in homes, at the office, and for industrial applications could save more than $50 billion and reduce as much carbon emissions as caused by all U.S. cars and light trucks in a year.
That’s according to an analysis Tuesday from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, which found the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act help avoid 1.3 billion tons of carbon emissions.
The bill has been introduced on a bipartisan basis in the House and Senate, with sponsors Sens. Rob Portman, Republican of Ohio, and Jeanne Shaheen, Democrat of New Hampshire, along with Reps. Peter Welch, Democrat of Vermont, and David McKinley, Republican of West Virginia.
It would strengthen national building codes for homes and commercial buildings, encouraging states and private industry to adopt those standards (although they are voluntary) by creating a new grant program for homebuilders and contractors to build more efficiently.
It would also direct the Energy Department to work with the private sector on R&D and commercialization of energy efficiency technologies that could be used in industrial applications.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee hosted a hearing on the House version of the bill on Wednesday morning.
The Rundown
New York Times How a trillion trees triumphed over Trump’s climate denialism
Associated Press Push to scale back US environmental law draws ire at hearing
New York Times A rare Trump-era climate policy hits an obstacle: the tax man
Reuters From wind power to cow manure: oil traders seek new profit recipe
Calendar
WEDNESDAY | FEB. 12
8 a.m. to 5 p.m. National Press Club. The 2020 Energy Storage Association Policy Forum convenes state and federal regulators, policymakers, storage industry members, utility decision makers, and power sector stakeholders.
THURSDAY | FEB. 13
9:30 a.m., 1101 New York Avenue NW. The Business Council for Sustainable Energy and Bloomberg New Energy Finance host a press briefing on the release of the eighth annual edition of the Sustainable Energy in America Factbook.
