E&E: Hill climate caucus warns EPA of ‘crippling’ delays on carbon storage
Members of the House Bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus want to know why EPA has delayed permitting of underground carbon dioxide storage projects.
The lawmakers further argue the inaction is “actively crippling U.S. efforts to deploy vital clean energy and carbon capture infrastructure alike.”
In a letter sent by seven lawmakers to EPA Administrator Michael Regan, they also challenge EPA’s “dismal” record of deploying so-called Class VI wells for long-term underground carbon storage following their approval through the permitting process.
“We understand the EPA is currently processing one hundred and eighty-one Class VI well permit applications,” wrote the lawmakers, led by co-chairs Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.) and Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.).
“While we recognize that there are advanced engineering and environmental safety considerations that must be accounted for in Class VI well permitting and state primacy designation, there is no time to waste in deploying carbon sequestration infrastructure, which will play a vital role in decarbonizing the U.S. economy.”
A spokesperson for EPA said the agency was working “as expeditiously as possible” to process permitting applications.
Funding has been made available over the years, the members added, including through the 45Q tax credit for carbon sequestration technology in the Inflation Reduction Act and various investments through the bipartisan infrastructure law.
An appropriations bill for fiscal 2021 directed a minimum of $3 million for EPA to facilitate the completion of Class VI well projects and, at the end of 2023, “EPA cited hiring 1977 new staff and expanding the number of full-time equivalents processing Class VI permits from a few people to more than twenty-five.”
Further, in the spending bill Congress recently passed to fund government operations for the remainder of fiscal 2024, EPA is singled out to receive “no less than” $5 million to work around Class VI wells, a category for carbon storage the agency established in 2010 that involves injecting CO2 underground into deep rock formations.
“Unfortunately,” the signers of the letter wrote, “despite amplified federal support, private sector investment, and improved staff capacity, the agency has been unable to meet its stated two-year goal for processing Class VI permits and state primacy applications.”
The members “respectfully request a comprehensive response outlining the challenges that EPA is facing in meeting its goal of reducing processing timelines for Class VI well permits and state primacy applications to better understand how Congress can work to address them.”
Permitting focus for caucus
The Climate Solutions Caucus relaunched last July after several years of dormancy. Since coming back onto the scene, it has urged leadership of both parties to prioritize legislation to streamline the broader federal process for energy project permitting and organized an official delegation to the COP28 climate summit in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
The 64-member group is equally divided between Republicans and Democrats. In addition to Garbarino and Houlahan, those who signed the letter to EPA this week are California Reps. David Valadao (R) and Scott Peters (D); New York GOP Reps. Mike Lawler and Anthony D’Esposito; and Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio).
The substance of their letter is significant in that it warns of a “rapidly closing … window for impactful climate action” and says it is “imperative that the U.S. deploy carbon sequestration infrastructure as quickly as possible.”
Remmington Belford, an EPA spokesperson, said in a statement: “We agree on the importance of the UIC Class VI permitting process being transparent, timely, and in compliance with all regulations,” adding, ”The EPA is committed to reviewing UIC Class VI permits as expeditiously as possible when the agency is the permitting authority.”
He said EPA’s goal is to make a determination on permits 24 months after receipt of an application. Belford pointed to progress on projects in California and Louisiana while noting the permitting process involves a “multidisciplinary evaluation” process that focuses on a variety of factors, including whether drinking water will be endangered.
“We are continuously working to develop staff expertise and increase capacity,” he said, noting that there are now 34 fulltime employees working on the matter.