Started By
Message

US carbon pipeline company pledges no oil recovery, but Bakken drillers want it

Posted on 3/11/24 at 8:55 am
Posted by ragincajun03
Member since Nov 2007
21182 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 8:55 am
quote:

March 11 (Reuters) - Summit Carbon Solutions, which is trying to build the biggest carbon dioxide capture pipeline in the United States to transport and bury greenhouse gases, has repeatedly pledged its project will not be used by drillers to boost output from oil fields.

But Summit has a different message for prospective clients, including North Dakota’s oil sector, according to a Reuters review of state regulatory filings and recordings of public appearances by company executives: if you want to use our project for enhanced oil recovery (EOR), where gas is pumped into oil fields to increase production, just write a check.

The dual messages illustrate Summit's efforts to court broad support for its $5.5 billion project, which could capture as much as 18 million metric tons of CO2 annually from 57 Midwest ethanol plants and store it underground at a site in North Dakota.

Whether Summit succeeds at its goal to break ground in 2025 and begin operations in 2026 is a major test for carbon capture and storage, a key tool in the fight against climate change but which faces obstacles like unproven scalability and public apprehension.

The ethanol industry wants Summit to sequester its carbon to drive down its carbon intensity and draw lucrative tax credits from state and federal clean fuel programs.

But the oil industry wants to use the pipeline for EOR, reflecting a belief among drillers in North Dakota’s Bakken that oil recovery is necessary to reverse the once-booming region’s flagging output
. North Dakota oil players launched the group Friends of Ag and Energy in December to promote carbon pipelines like Summit's, including through thousands of dollars of radio ads.


quote:

Summit has long maintained, in both sworn testimony, opens new tab to state pipeline regulators and on its website, opens new tab, that it does not intend to use its project for EOR.

"The Summit Carbon Solutions project will not be used for enhanced oil recovery," the website reads. "Summit does not intend to ship CO2 for use in EOR," the company told the Iowa Utilities Board (IUB) last August.

Environmental groups generally oppose EOR because of its potential to extend the life of the fossil fuels industry.

But more recently, Summit officials have indicated that using the pipeline to ship carbon for boosting oil production is a future likelihood
.


quote:

North Dakota's oil production peaked in late 2019, opens new tab after a nearly decade-long drilling boom that made it one of the country’s top crude suppliers, and it has yet to recover, according to data from the Energy Information Administration.

The state will need as much as ten times more CO2 than it can capture from stationary sources to free billions of barrels of oil trapped in Bakken fields, said John Harju, vice president for strategic partnerships at the University of North Dakota's Energy and Environmental Research Center.

"Importing CO2 via pipeline is something that I think at the end of the day is going to be necessary," Harju said.
Summit has faced setbacks in securing state permits, including in North Dakota, and land easements from some landowners along its route over safety, land rights, and environmental concerns.


quote:

Summit's current focus on sequestration is in part due to the 45Q tax credit program, expanded by the Inflation Reduction Act, which offers $85 per ton of sequestered carbon and just $50 per ton for EOR.

A shift in that policy could alter the company's priorities around EOR, executives and oil industry players said.


LINK /
Posted by GBPackTigers
Louisiana
Member since Sep 2009
1068 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 8:59 am to
These people are a joke with carbon capture. Stop wasting my tax dollars and fix roads, bridges, railroads, airports and airplanes instead.

Want to capture carbon, plant trees. They will destroy ecosystems to build these moronic projects.
Posted by ehidal1
Chief Boot Knocka
Member since Dec 2007
37133 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 9:00 am to
More corporate welfare from the administration that claims they don’t pay their fair share
Posted by Limitlesstigers
Lafayette
Member since Nov 2019
2788 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 9:03 am to
"Carbon Capture" is the biggest boondoggle going right now. There's literally natural gas plants that limit 99% of carbon and methane from going up in the air that cost a fraction of what these things cost.
Posted by Penrod
Member since Jan 2011
39112 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 9:07 am to
quote:

These people are a joke with carbon capture.

quote:

Want to capture carbon, plant trees.

Planting trees helps, but the excess carbon is driving the greening of the planet without any human action. However, plants will not be even close to keeping up with the excess carbon we are emitting. If you want to keep the CO2 levels in the atmosphere under control (I'm not sure whether this is needed or not, and neither are you) then you have to either slow down emissions or capture and sequester. Planting trees is not a solution.
Posted by Penrod
Member since Jan 2011
39112 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 9:16 am to
quote:

There's literally natural gas plants that limit 99% of carbon and methane from going up in the air that cost a fraction of what these things cost.
This is nonsense. It's true that gas plants "stop" 99% of methane from being emitted, but emissions of 1% would be horrible, so that is a meaninglessly low bar.

Gas plants limiting CO2 emissions is a bizarre point, because CO2 emissions don't happen very much at gas plants; they happen where the gas is burned - at the customers of the gas plants. The only sizeable CO2 emitters I can think of at most gas plants is in the reboilers of glycol and amine regenerators. And it is an extremely rare gas plant that does anything to limit them.
Posted by lostinbr
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Oct 2017
9298 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 10:38 am to
I assumed he was referring to combined cycle gas plants, not treating plants.
Posted by Woolfpack
Member since Jun 2021
279 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 11:43 am to
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/16/24 at 6:44 pm
Posted by AllDayEveryDay
Nawf Tejas
Member since Jun 2015
7011 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 12:03 pm to
We process about a BCF/day in ND and I haven't heard shite about this. Which I would, because we have two similar projects for capture/injection with joint partners in other areas.
Posted by ragincajun03
Member since Nov 2007
21182 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 12:21 pm to
quote:

I haven't heard shite about this


About the Summit pipeline? It's a pretty big one, planned to span across multiple states.

Or just haven't heard anything about them allowing O&G operators to tap into the line and use CO2 for EOR operations?
Posted by bad93ex
Member since Sep 2018
27031 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 12:38 pm to
quote:

More corporate welfare from the administration that claims they don’t pay their fair share


Wasn’t that the entire basis of their campaign? We are gonna make those rich people and corporations pay in their fair share and 3.5 years later who is absolutely killing? Not the lower and middle class folks.
Posted by Saunson69
Member since May 2023
1757 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 12:42 pm to
quote:

Want to capture carbon, plant trees


I don't know if this is carbon negative. Trees take in a lot of CO2 during life, but when they die and decompose, it releases CO2 back into atmosphere. I'm not sure on the exact math, but that may be carbon neutral, just taking in to release same amount.
Posted by Riverside
Member since Jul 2022
2295 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 12:46 pm to
Is there a point to this article? Reuters writes a hit piece on a pipeline company, because, gasp, it might ultimately help the evil fossil fuel industry. I’m just trying to understand the point of this article.
Posted by ninthward
Boston, MA
Member since May 2007
20389 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 12:47 pm to
quote:

These people are a joke with carbon capture. Stop wasting my tax dollars and fix roads, bridges, railroads, airports, and airplanes instead.

Want to capture carbon, plant trees. They will destroy ecosystems to build these moronic projects.
its never been about the environment but the mouthbreathers will take it as truth.

Posted by AllDayEveryDay
Nawf Tejas
Member since Jun 2015
7011 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 1:24 pm to
Either. We haven't been approached to offload or about carbon capture.
Posted by GoldenGuy
Member since Oct 2015
10863 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 1:37 pm to
quote:

I don't know if this is carbon negative. Trees take in a lot of CO2 during life, but when they die and decompose, it releases CO2 back into atmosphere. I'm not sure on the exact math, but that may be carbon neutral, just taking in to release same amount.


Photosynthesis.

6CO2 + 6H2O -> C6H12O6 + 6O2

Some Carbon does remain in the soil after decomposition.

What I’m trying to remember is what component of oil/gas is the tiniest we can get back. I was pretty sure it wasn’t petrol.
Posted by ragincajun03
Member since Nov 2007
21182 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 2:16 pm to
quote:

Is there a point to this article?


Personally, I just thought it was interesting that Bakken E&Ps supposedly might eventually be interested in tapping into the CO2 pipeline to source gas for their EOR operations. Others may not find it interesting.

quote:

Reuters writes a hit piece on a pipeline company, because, gasp, it might ultimately help the evil fossil fuel industry.


I'm very pro-oil & gas industry, and I didn't find this article to be a hit piece at all. It didn't seem pro or anti-O&G to me.
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
118689 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 2:19 pm to
quote:

a key tool in the fight against climate change
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
118689 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 2:20 pm to
quote:


The ethanol industry wants Summit to sequester its carbon to drive down its carbon intensity


No.

quote:

and draw lucrative tax credits from state and federal clean fuel programs.



Yes.
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
118689 posts
Posted on 3/11/24 at 2:22 pm to
quote:

Environmental groups generally oppose EOR because of its potential to extend the life of the fossil fuels industry.



CCS is a boon for the O&G industry. But the climate change nuts don't get it. They are just O&G patsies.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram