ESG & Industry Updates

This Wednesday, the Biden Administration unveiled a 2 trillion dollar transportation, infrastructure and economic recovery package. The goal of the bill is to create jobs, fix/upgrade US infrastructure, and combat climate change as the country attempts to recover from the COVID induced economic slump.

The bill is extremely large and multifaceted, so we are going to try and give a super brief summary of the major takeaways and points here as best we can with the disclaimer that because the bill hasn't passed yet, different points are subject to change as it moves through the legislative process.

In terms of the scope of the bill, it is anticipated to cost $2 trillion dollars over 8 years. The spending will be funded over 15 years by increasing the corporate tax rate from 21% to 28% and "discouraging offshoring" to tax havens (although specifics on the measures being taken to prevent offshoring have not yet been released). The corporate tax rate was lowered to the current 21% in 2017 by Republicans from its prior rate of 35% - so this increase, if passed, would still keep the corporate rate substantially below its prior level. Despite the fact that it will still be lower than 2016, this portion of the bill is expected to face stiff partisan opposition. It's unclear what provisions may change (if any) based on if funding sources need to be adjusted, so that is something to keep an eye on as the bill progresses. 

Projects focused on in the package on the transportation/infrastructure side include repair/replace of 20,000 miles of roads/highways, repair of 10,000 bridges, the addition of 500,000 Electric Vehicle charging stations, universal broadband, and the replacement of all lead pipes in drinking water systems nationwide. Those portions of the bill comprise about 900 million dollars, give or take (approximately 620 million for roads & bridges, 300 million for water & electric infrastructure). Additionally, there is a focus on expanding rail transport, notably in the Northeast. 

Another 580 billion dollars of the bill is directed to "American manufacturing, research and development, and job training efforts". Presumably the job training efforts include retraining of workers for "green jobs" as the bill includes climate related provisions congruent with Biden's so called "Build Back America Better" agenda, including the EV charger expansion we mentioned, rebates for consumers to encourage EV purchases, moving 20% of school busses to electric, and a provision to replace 50,000 diesel public transportation vehicles. 

Outside of strictly transportation/infrastructure, the bill also includes spending for building & retrofitting affordable housing, providing direct aid to the elderly & disabled, and modernization efforts for water ports and airports. 

As mentioned, the bill is extremely large and covers a lot of areas - definitely something to watch as it progresses through the legislative process and we find out what does or does not get included in the passage - there's something in there that impacts almost everyone, but hopefully this quick overview was helpful in outlining some of the major points relevant to our readers. 

Friday, March 23rd, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker signed into law Senate Bill 9 "An Act Creating a Next Generation Roadmap for Massachusetts Climate Change Policy" that includes provisions described as "some of the most aggressive greenhouse gas emissions reductions targets in the country"

The ultimate goal of the bill is for Massachusetts to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, and includes 5 year sublimit goals to that end for impacted sectors (transportation, buildings, etc).

The bill also serves to codify Environmental Justice provisions into Massachusetts law, to both define disparately impacted communities, and provide new tools and protections for those communities going forward. As part of the Environmental Justice approach, $12 million in annual funding was established for the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center to create a pathway to clean energy for environmental justice communities, minority and women owned businesses and fossil fuel industry workers. 

The Department of Public Utilities (DPU) is additionally required to balance equity and accessibility as part of their decision making process regarding regulations in addition to safety, system security, and emissions reductions. Lastly, the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) is expanded to require environmental impact studies for all projects that impact air quality within a mile of Environmental Justice Neighborhoods and evaluate not just the proposed project's impact but the cumulative impact to the area of projects over time. 

Other major takeaways from the bill:

• Utilities - first-time greenhouse gas emissions standard for municipal lighting plants, requiring 50% non-emitting electricity by 2030, 75 percent by 2040 and net-zero by 2050.
• Solar - The bill prioritizes equitable solar program access for low-income neighborhoods. It also provides solar incentives for businesses by exempting them from net metering cap so they can set solar up on business properties to offset electric usage (and cost).
• Wind - utilities will be required to buy an additional 2,400 megawatts of offshore wind 
• Natural Gas - Enhanced pipeline safety goals that require adopting provisions including increased fines for safety violations, and enhanced training/certification requirements for utility contractors. Also sets targets for leak reduction along pipelines. 
• Technology & Other Related Items: Senate Bill 9 also sets benchmarks for clean energy technology - electric vehicles, EV charging stations, anaerobic digesters, solar technology, and energy storage technology. Additionally, on the consumer side there are new regulations set for appliance energy efficiency. 

Obviously, the bill is very comprehensive and there are a lot of details and policy changes involved, some of which we won't know the exact implications of until new projects that are under its scope start rolling out. You can read more on the exact provisions at the Mass.gov website if you are interested in digging into the details, starting with the official press release here: Governor Baker Signs Climate Legislation to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Protect Environmental Justice Communities

The new Administration is off to a running start, as Wednesday saw a flurry of Executive Orders come out, many of which deal with climate change, and the oil & gas industry. There are a lot of items, and they are all pretty detailed with substantial backstory, but we are going to try and briefly touch on the three major items relevant to the industry and quickly go over the main points (or, try to at least!) 

So, here's the recap:

Keystone XL:  The Biden Administration cancelled the permitting for the Keystone XL pipeline, an $8 billion dollar project that would run over 800K barrels per day from Canada through the United States. Specifically, the pipeline runs from Alberta to Nebraska, where it would then hook with existing pipeline infrastructure running to the Gulf Coast refineries. There seems to be no recourse for TC Energy to fight the permit cancellation per se, the only major sway could theoretically be if Canada argues on behalf of the project continuing but according to analysts, that will be a non-starter, Trudeau is extremely unlikely to broach the subject with the Administration amid attempts to smooth a relationship between the two countries that was somewhat fractured during the prior administration's tenure. 

Moratorium on Federal Oil & Gas Leasing:  Another executive order has put a moratorium on the lease of any federal land or offshore waters for oil & gas development. The order also stipulates that current permits in effect be reviewed against the new standard, presumably to see if some additional will be cancelled. The Administration has a stated aim of "protecting at least 30% of federal land and offshore waters" as a general goal, and the moratorium appears to be a part of that aim. Currently, fossil fuel leasing on Federal land accounts for approximately 25% of carbon emission output, which is the impetus for the move. However, as others have pointed out, the leasing also provides around 8.1 billion dollars annually in tax revenue to tribal, state, and federal governments.  22% of oil production, and 12% of natural gas production takes place on federal lands and although this moratorium does not affect current operations (yet) there is some concern that a move toward stopping production on federal land, which is the possible end goal, would push the US back into becoming a net importer of petroleum as the economy continues to recover and demand begins to increase. However, its important to note that states have wildly disparate levels of reliance on federal land for production - New Mexico is largely federally based, whereas even a complete halt would not affect Texas very much, as production land is almost exclusively privately held. This is a watch-and-see item for sure, as no one is really clear on the end goal or next steps on this item yet. 

Paris Accords  The Biden Administration has additionally rejoined the Paris Climate Accord, which the prior Administration withdrew from last year. The US, under President Obama, played a major role in crafting the Paris Accord in 2015. The agreement overall aims to keep global temperatures from rising no more than 2 degrees Celsius (ideally 1.5... we are already up 1 degree) by way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The agreement is essentially an international treaty with almost 200 member countries who have pledged to take various steps to curb emissions in their respective countries. There are a million details within the Accord, but for the US the actions required include (among others) cutting emissions by 26% below 2005 levels by 2025, tightening fuel economy standards, and would also heavily rely on the "Clean Power Plan" to hit targets. Rejoining the Paris agreement is an important symbolic gesture for the Biden Administration, as one of the major focuses they will have is "putting climate at the center of domestic, national security, and policy" 

So those are the major points relating to the industry from Wednesday, and they are definitely items we will continue to follow and update on. It will certainly be interesting to watch how these unfold and shape the energy industry landscape over the coming four years. Stay tuned! 

Controversy is brewing on the issue, of all things, of wood pellets. 

Here in New England, wood pellet stoves have been around forever, and we saw a noticeable uptick in usage when energy prices were high several years ago, as wood stoves offered an additional, lower cost way to keep the thermostat a little lower than you otherwise could. A 40lb bag of pellets runs you about 5 bucks at a home improvement store and will heat for approximately 24 hours, give or take. Plus you get that nice old timey fireplace smell, good stuff. 

So what's the issue with them anyway? The issue is less with residential use and more with biomass generated electricity. Wood pellets are designated biomass by US and International policy - they are designated as a renewable resource because (obviously) trees are regrown. A focus of the growth of wood pellets has been the designation that they are a carbon-neutral heating source. But are they really? 

Scientists in both Europe and the US are arguing that the actual burning of the pellets is more carbon intensive than coal, and that the length of the cycle to replace and regrow the source trees for the pellets ought to be considered - after all, it can take decades for full regrowth, which slows the ability of replanted trees to absorb the carbon. They also argue that the carbon neutrality fails to take into account the transportation impact of Europe's usage. Europe is a major user of pellets, and because of the lack of suitable forestry, they import them, largely from the Southeastern US.  

Why are they such heavy users when they lack the natural resources? Because ten years ago, the European Commission issued a Renewable Energy Directive to its member countries that 20 percent of their energy should come from renewable sources by 2020. The burning of biomass such as wood pellets was one way to meet that goal. Indeed, carbon emissions from burning wood are not counted toward a nation’s emissions output, due to a controversial provision of the Kyoto Protocol.

This faulty logic has led to massive renewable energy subsidies for biomass under the EU Renewable Energy Directive program. With that said, a number of countries have embraced biomass electricity, which scientists argue is actually speeding up climate change, pollution and forest destruction. Currently, biomass represents nearly 60 percent of the EU’s renewable energy total.

Because of the subsidies, it's beneficial for EU nations to import the pellets, and the demand on producers in the US has resulted in deforestration, which scientists warn could make the impact of extreme weather conditions far more severe since forests play a critical role in slowing flooding and erosion, in addition to their obvious role in absorbing atmospheric carbon.

Biomass plants have come under criticism because of all these factors by both scientists and environmentalists, and both legislators and the community seem to be coming to agreement that biomass electricity plants may not be the best way to renewable energy. This year we are seeing permits for new facilities being turned down everywhere from the Netherlands to Virginia. 

I wrote an article for Oil & Energy Magazine that goes into the specifics of the objections to wood pellets & biomass produced electricity. You can read that article in its entirety here: Are Wood Pellets Speeding Up Climate Change?

With the Oil Industry, Climate Change, and emissions top of mind after last night's Presidential Debates, we thought it was a good time to review what Massachusetts, New England, and specifically, the Oil Industry in the Northeast have been doing on emissions and climate change recently. 

The Local Industry: In September 2019, the Northeast's heating oil sector voted unanimously at the NEFI energy conference to establish a goal of Net Zero GHG emissions by 2050 (drooping 15% by 2023, 40% by 2030, Net Zero by 2050). You can read the details of the the unanimous motion here: The Road to Net Zero Starts Here 

Beyond specific carbon level moves, the New England & Northeast region has been ahead of the game for decades on promoting biofuels and renewable energy projects. This is a great snapshot of regional Biofuel and renewable energy standards by state in the region: Biofuel & Electrification at a Glance

Massachusetts & the City of Boston were some of the earliest and most ardent adopters of biodiesel and other clean energy options, including sulfur limits in diesel fuel & heating oil. New York moved first to ultra low sulfur diesel regionally, and New York City adopted biofuels very early on.

Regionally though, all of the Northeast states have been working diligently on doing what they can to adopt more renewable and environmentally friendly options from regional food waste to fuel recycling, to major solar projects, to geothermal microzones, to making Crude from wood in Maine.

Massachusetts: In April 2020, the Baker-Polito Administration issued a formal determination letter that officially set the legal limit for emissions at net zero for 2050. The Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) official statement is:

"A level of statewide greenhouse gas emissions that is equal in quantity to the amount of carbon dioxide or its equivalent that is removed from the atmosphere and stored annually by, or attributable to, the Commonwealth; provided, however, that in no event shall the level of emissions be greater than a level that is 85 percent below the 1990 level". 

In other words, not only net-zero on emissions but emissions overall (captured or not) need to stay below previously established levels. 

The net zero target was initially announced in January 2018 at Baker's State of the Commonwealth address. The way the State achieves the goal for 2050 will be laid out in the "2050 Roadmap", and the roadmap will also be used to set interim emission limits for 2030, and those limits will be officially laid out in the "Massachusetts Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2030". You can follow updates to the plan at mass.gov here: MA Decarbonization Roadmap

In addition to the newer net zero goals, Massachusetts has been on the leading edge of climate and emissions reduction goals for decades - for a refresher:

Massachusetts Green Communities -  Communities can compete for grants to support energy efficiency & renewable projects in the Commonwealth. This includes ventilation system upgrades, heating system conversions, electric vehicles, insulation projects, etc. 

Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative & Transportation Climate Inititatives - regional incentivized emission reduction

Heres an overall recap on what the state accomplished for 2018 on Clean Energy: Massachusetts Pushes Clean Energy Forward in 2018

Overall: There is much work to be done on climate, and serious questions need to develop into serious policy based answers going forward.

One can only hope that we see some movement on climate initiatives in some form in the next 4 years that moves the needle while balancing the serious economic concerns of businesses and consumers, regardless of what the winning Administration looks like. 

We're glad to work in a region that is putting the work in to make changes while attempting to maintain that balance.

The newest passenger boat for Maine's Casco Bay Lines will be running a diesel-electric hybrid propulsion engine. The hybrid will be handling the Portland to Peaks Island run, fully on electricity. The diesel engine will function as a backup, or be engaged for trips longer than the normal run. This assigned route is approximately 2.5 miles, which should allow the ferry to travel one way, charge at docking (~10-15 minutes) and run the return trip on electricity as well. 

If you aren't familiar, Casco Bay Line's ferry runs all year round and carries over a million passengers, 30,000 vehicles, and 5,300 tons of freight in a given year, so they are a critical part of transportation in Maine,. The ferry functions as a vital link between the islands & main lands that allows for commuting to school, work, and postage services. 

The project is being funded in part by a Federal Grant as part of the Federal Transit Administrations Ferry Grant Program. Vessels essentially hit a point where maintenance becomes cost prohibitive (after about 30 years of operation), and the grant for this particular ferry project will replace one such vessel. The replacement with a hybrid is projected to eliminate up to 800 metric tons of carbon emissions annually. The new vessel should be completed and in operation by the end of 2022. 

I wrote an article for Oil & Energy this month about the Casco Bay project, as well as the Federal Fund Grant generally. You can read that article in its entirety here: A Ferry Different Approach

Even as Coronavirus disrupts business as usual, talks regarding the TCI (Transportation Climate Initiative) continue via video conference and email amongst the involved 12 States & Washington DC. 

The TCI is a cap and invest system to curb emissions, with some estimates putting the reduction of carbon emissions at up to 3 times as much as we have achieved with the RGGI (Regional Greenhouse Gas Initialtive) enacted 10 years ago. (For a quick review of what the TCI entails and how it works, go here:  What's the TCI & How Does It Work?) 

The pandemic has caused adjusted timelines for the initiative. Current adjusted timelines for the TCI put the final Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in the fall of this year, and it appears states planning on joining are looking at a launch date of January 2022.

As discussed prior, the impact of the TCI would be a tax of 5-17 cents per gallon, and as expected, its looking like 17 will be the number. At that level, transportation emissions, (which comprise 40% of greenhouse gas in the region) would drop by 25% by 2032. (As an aside - without the TCI being passed, emissions are expected to drop in that category by 19% based on efficiencies, etc - not including any pandemic induced curbing of emissions). 

While we are seeing lower fuel prices, which would generally make passing the TCI or similar plans involving gas taxes more viable politically, on the other side of the equation there is legitimate concern that the economic impacts of COVID-19 make the timing of any tax increases tone deaf (at best), especially in the face of the unemployment levels we are seeing. 

We wrote an article for the July issue of Oil & Energy detailing the progress being made on the TCI regional talks, as well as some of the details in contention. You can read that article here:  TCI Moves Forward  

You may have been hearing about the Transportation & Climate Initiative (TCI) on the news recently - in particular, you have probably been hearing about the implications the TCI would have on the gas tax. (That goes double for those of you in Massachusetts, where gas taxes were a major point of contention in the prior few election cycles)

The TCI is a cap-and-trade system for incentivizing development of fuel efficient technologies, while simultaneously putting a "cap" on emissions and a price on carbon offsets to reach those caps, where needed. 

So if it goes into effect, what happens? What you have probably mostly heard about is that depending on which option the TCI takes officially (25%, 22.5%, or 20% reduction in emissions by 2032) the gas tax you pay at the pump would go up 5, 9, or 17 cents per gallon (estimated). 

But there is a lot more to the program and it's goals than just an at the pump tax, in fact, that's not even the main part of the program. The main portion of the Initiative is the emissions cap and the corollary carbon allowances that would be required for transportation companies to offset their fuel's carbon dioxide production. Carbon allowances can be both auctioned and traded, and money from their sales would go to member states for further transportation emission reduction measures. 

There is a lot involved in the program, some of which is relatively complex. I wrote an article for Oil & Energy Magazine this past month that runs through the basic framework of the program, what the estimated goals are for both emission reductions and revenue generation, and what impacts are projected for consumers.

You can read that article here: TCI: What's Under the Hood?

The Massachusetts legislature is considering a bill that would set up what would essentially be test geothermal projects to determine if what are being called "GeoMicroDistrict"s could be used going forward for heating & cooling of buildings and neighborhoods. The goal of this is that if it works, utilities would able to buy/source geothermal for energy supply in addition to (or instead of) natural gas. 

The project would be a partnership with Eversource and the Department of Public Utilities, based off of feasibility studies performed by a UK based engineering firm (BuroHappold Engineering). The project would use existing infrastructure with the addition of bore drilled vertical holes, ambient waterlines, etc. Eversource presented a plan for the project to the DPU, and described it to the Mass Legislature for consideration.

If the project moves forward, it would be a large step forward in reducing building & residence based emissions, which have been an ongoing concern for MA cities and towns, particularly those in more dense urban type settings where solar or wind farms are space limited, as are the accompanying larger scale batteries they would require to ensure full reliability. Geothermal may be a good option to "fill in the gaps" other renewable sources can leave in different settings.  

You can read more detail on the project here: Massachusetts Considers Substituting Geothermal for Natural Gas

(Not really clear on what geothermal is exactly? The US EIA has a good quick overview here: EIA: Geothermal Explained )

Massachusetts has committed to aggressively reducing carbon emissions, and geothermal has been coming up increasingly often as a potential source of greener energy, whether in addition to, or in lieu of current options. In fact we have heard geothermal come up in everything from the climate change forum of the State Democratic Primary (Ed Markey versus Shannon Liss-Riordan) to budget discussions on new regional school construction. (After initial approval, Waconah high school's new building in Dalton MA will not use geothermal based on cost, you can read that local story here: Price-Conscious Waconah Panel drops Geothermal Option )

It appears that the State is seriously looking at adding more geothermal options to the energy mix in order to meet climate change mitigation goals that have been set. 

The ongoing quest to lower carbon emissions has shown some promising progress with the processes of capture & store, direct air capture of carbon, and the development of SynFuels that use captured CO2 to create fuel** 

Shell's Quest Carbon Capture & Store project in Edmonton has reached the milestone of over four million tons of carbon captured & stored, or the equivalent of the annual combined emissions of a million cars. Quest captures about a third of the carbon generated by the Scotsgard Upgrader on site - the Upgrader itself turns oil sands bitumen into synthetic crude oil that is in turn refined into other fuel products. Pretty awesome setup, actually. (You can read more about this project and Shell's projects in carbon capturing globally here: Carbon Capture & Storage Projects )

The Direct Air Capture model is also showing some success, with Climeworks leading the charge with the first commercial DAC facility being opened in 2017. Climeworks’ DAC technology is based on a capture-regeneration process using a filter made of porous granulates modified with amines. Fans are used to draw in atmospheric CO2 that chemically bonds to the filter’s surface. Once saturated, the filter is then heated to around 100°C, releasing high-purity gaseous CO2. The filters can operate for several thousand cycles before needing to be replaced. In addition, the devices are powered by waste stock energy as well, which is awesome. (For more about what they are doing and how the technology works, check here: Climeworks )

I also wrote an article for Oil & Energy Magazine this month going into some more detail on the subject of carbon capture and the potential market for carbon in the future. You can read that article here:  Carbon Capture: Store It & Sell It

**(it's important to note that SynFuels do not lower atmospheric carbon but are a net-zero carbon potential alternative to both conventional fuels and biofuels that can impact the environment on an agricultural side via the use of fertile land, etc)