Gov. Mark Gordon has blasted the Biden administration's final methane rule, claiming it will lead to higher fuel prices and put additional burdens on Wyoming oil and gas producers.

John Burrows, director of energy and climate policy for the Wyoming Outdoor Council, said the public health benefits of the rule are significant.

The move to reduce toxic air pollution produced at oil and gas facilities will be equivalent to taking 28 million gas-powered cars off the road.

"So we're talking about volatile organic compounds that create really nasty chemicals for people to inhale," said Burrows. "And unfortunately those do have health impacts, especially for those most vulnerable populations. And this rule is going to clean a lot of that up."

The new Environmental Protection Agency rule, which calls on operators to find and plug leaks and limit flaring, builds on successful protections Wyoming pioneered in its efforts to improve air quality in the Upper Green River Basin.

Methane, the primary component of natural gas, is over 80 times more potent than CO2 at trapping heat in the atmosphere.

States have two years to submit their emission plans to the EPA.

Katherine Stahl, a community organizer with the Powder River Basin Resource Council, conceded that any new regulation brings some costs.

But she noted that Gov. Gordon rejected federal funds meant to reimburse operators who find and plug leaks.

If methane is kept in pipelines and holding tanks, she said more gas can be brought to market.

"More gas going to market reduces the cost that consumers will pay, because supply will be higher," said Stahl. "And it increases revenue for operators that otherwise would be just burning what is a valuable resource."

Burrows said he believes that reducing methane waste will help Wyoming taxpayers get more value for developing their non-renewable resources -- and bring additional revenues needed to fund schools, roads and other essential operations.

"Across U.S. public and tribal lands there's over $500 million of wasted gas," said Burrows. "And in Wyoming we're talking somewhere between $9 and $16 million in lost revenues specifically to Wyoming taxpayers."




get more stories like this via email

Bad air quality days are a heightened concern as ozone season begins in North Carolina.

Ozone season in the state lasts from March through October, when hot weather increases the prevalence of ground-level ozone.

Rafaella Vaca, education manager for the advocacy group CleanAIRE NC, said there are health effects from poor ozone days.

"Symptoms like shortness of breath, coughing and throat irritation as short term impacts," Vaca explained. "Over time, it can cause inflamed airways and worsen conditions like asthma, bronchitis, emphysema, and also increase your susceptibility to lung infections."

Ground-level ozone forms from chemical reactions between nitrogen oxides and organic compounds emitted from car exhaust, aerosols and manufacturing facilities.

Vaca acknowledged the effects of bad ozone are not often discussed, probably in part because it cannot be seen, even though it contributes to smog.

"It's not emitted directly from car emissions but it forms when pollutants come together in sunlight," Vaca noted. "It's a little bit more of a complicated process."

Vaca emphasized there are ways for people to protect themselves and others, including by driving less and using public transportation more often. People can also check the Air Quality Index and limit activities outside when levels are high.

Vaca argued regulatory agencies like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality can do more to protect people.

"They need to consider all air emissions and contaminations that can affect your well-being," Vaca urged. "Unfortunately, that's not currently how this system works because each air pollution permit is evaluated as and only one pollution source to consider versus considering all of them at once."

Earlier this month, the Federal Highway Administration stopped new funding for electric vehicle charging stations under the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program.

Through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the program allocated $5 billion over five years to all U.S. states, D.C., and Puerto Rico. Michigan was set to receive $110 million for fast-charging stations along key routes.

Chase Attanasio, policy manager for the advocacy group Clean Fuels Michigan, said despite the cuts, EV charging ports expansion plans in the state are affected but not aborted.

"The utility companies in Michigan have been and will continue to invest heavily in EV infrastructure deployments in their service territories that support a variety of different use cases," Attanasio pointed out. "And there are state programs that will continue to support EV charger deployments across the state."

The federal government will allow existing contracts to proceed with reimbursements until new guidance is issued.

There are currently 3,700 public charging stations around the Great Lakes State and the goal is to deploy 100 thousand by 2030. Attanasio believes Michigan has an opportunity to step up and take the lead in the clean mobility sector, despite uncertainties.

"Increasing investments in the clean mobility sectors will show Michigan's commitment to this industry," Attanasio contended. "And its commitment to transitioning and supporting the automotive industry in its transition towards electric vehicles."

The Federal government's initial goal was to increase the total number of public EV charging ports to 500,000 by 2030. Since Congress approved the funding, the current administration may face challenges in stopping the program on its own.

New legislation would transition more ocean-going container ships to run off electricity instead of diesel while they are docked at Washington ports. Proponents of the bill say implementing more shore power would improve air quality and cut emissions. Ships still need power when they are in port, and often leave engines idling. The diesel fumes have created health problems for nearby Puget Sound residents, including increased risk of cancer and other serious health effects.

Rep, Julia Reed, D-Seattle, introduced the shore power bill, and said both impacted communities and the shipping industry have high incentives to move away from diesel.

"We need both of these partners to kind of work together towards a common goal of creating shore power across Washington state in order to get this to work," she explained.

Reed noted the transition to electric power for Washington's ports will take years to implement and will be expensive, but added the shipping industry is motivated by the high cost of diesel to find alternative fuels, which are already in use in Europe and California.

Georgetown and South Park, two neighborhoods in Southern Seattle, as well as parts of Tacoma face severe health disparities due to the impacts of diesel fuel and other industries. Life expectancy is up to 20 years lower in these areas compared to other parts of the state. Reed says she recognizes this has been an issue for these communities for years.

"I think it's not an accident that a lot of poor browner communities tend to be the ones that are closest to these industrial impacts. And also those communities have been speaking out for themselves," she explained.

Reed said the coast electrification project will be funded in part by the Climate Commitment Act, which was upheld by Washington voters in 2024. The program uses a cap and trade system to help the state meet its goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 95% by 2050.


get more stories like this via email