American Petroleum Institute expresses concerns with EPA’s proposal on power plants emissions
The American Petroleum Institute (API) spoke out this week on the challenges in meeting the timeline for compliance with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed regulation on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from U.S. power plants.
While carbon capture (CCS) and hydrogen are promising technologies to help reduce GHG emissions, API points out that grid operators will need time to develop and build significant amounts of new infrastructure to support the deployment of these technologies. API officials added that the task is increasingly difficult with the nation’s complex and outdated permitting process.
“We urge EPA to comprehensively analyze the potential reliability risks of its proposal, recognizing it coincides with rising U.S. electricity demand. Today natural gas is responsible for 40% of electricity generation in America, helping meet growing demand and balancing variable renewable resources,” API Senior Vice President of Policy, Economics and Regulatory Affairs Dustin Meyer said. “Our industry is a leading innovator in low-carbon technologies like CCS and hydrogen, but significant overlapping regulatory and permitting hurdles threaten the buildout of the significant infrastructure needed to comply with this proposal.”
In comments filed with the EPA, API outlines the procedural and regulatory challenges that will need to be resolved to develop the necessary energy infrastructure. They outlined five main issues:
• Carbon Pipelines: There are currently more than 5,000 miles of carbon pipelines and API said the EPA’s proposal would require the construction of more than 4-5 times the existing footprint – an additional 20,000 to 25,000 miles of carbon pipelines to support CCS.
• Siting Authority: There is a significant lack of clarity surrounding siting authority for interstate CO2 pipelines.
• Geologic Storage: Large parts of the East Coast – particularly New England – lack local geological storage for CCS and will have to rely on intrastate pipelines to transport CO2 to suitable storage sites hundreds of miles away.
• Carbon Capture Permitting: Two active Class VI permits both took at least 3 years for the EPA to approve, with one taking six years from the time of the initial permit application to the final authorization to inject.
• NEPA Timeline: The average EIS takes four and a half years to complete, adding significant time to a project’s development to meet EPA’s implementation deadlines.
API officials said the permitting changes in the Fiscal Responsibility Act are a step in the right direction, but they said more is needed to establish a transparent, timely and consistent permitting process that would allow for the development of energy infrastructure projects like those needed to comply with EPA’s proposal.
Without action to address these concerns, EPA’s proposal could jeopardize grid stability, they added.
“The oil and natural gas industry has long been at the forefront of innovation, and it stands ready to work with policymakers to ensure grid reliability while advancing the robust development of the CCS and hydrogen markets,” Meyer said.
