A proposed Environmental Protection Agency rule intended to encourage industry to adopt best practices that reduce emissions of methane and thereby avoid paying. Photo via Canva

Oil and natural gas companies for the first time would have to pay a fee for methane emissions that exceed certain levels under a rule proposed Friday by the Biden administration.

The proposed Environmental Protection Agency rule follows through on a directive from Congress included in the 2022 climate law. The new fee is intended to encourage industry to adopt best practices that reduce emissions of methane and thereby avoid paying.

Methane is a climate “super pollutant” that is more potent in the short term than carbon dioxide and is responsible for about one-third of greenhouse gas emissions. The oil and natural gas sector is the largest industrial source of methane emissions in the United States, and advocates say reduction of methane emissions is an important way to slow climate change.

Excess methane produced this year would result in a fee of $900 per ton, with fees rising to $1,500 per ton by 2026.

EPA Administrator Michael Regan said the proposed fee would work in tandem with a final rule on methane emissions EPA announced last month. The fee, formally known as the Methane Emissions Reduction Program, will encourage early deployment of available technologies to reduce methane emissions and other harmful air pollutants before the new standards take effect, he said.

The rule announced in December includes a two-year phase-in period for companies to eliminate routine flaring of natural gas from new oil wells.

“EPA is delivering on a comprehensive strategy to reduce wasteful methane emissions that endanger communities and fuel the climate crisis,” Regan said in a statement. When finalized later this year, the proposed methane fee will set technology standards that will “incentivize industry innovation'' and spur action to reduce pollution, he said.

Leading oil and gas companies already meet or exceed performance levels set by Congress under the climate law, meaning they will not have to pay the proposed fee, Regan and other officials said.

Sen. Tom Carper, chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said he was pleased the administration was moving forward with the methane fee as directed by Congress.

“We know methane is over 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide at trapping heat in our atmosphere in the short term,'' said Carper, D-Del. He said the program "will incentivize producers to cut wasteful and excessive methane emissions during oil and gas production.”

New Jersey Rep. Frank Pallone, the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said oil and gas companies have long calculated that it's cheaper to waste methane through flaring and other techniques than to make necessary upgrades to prevent leaks.

“Wasted methane never makes its way to consumers, but they are nevertheless stuck with the bill,” Pallone said. The proposed methane fee “will ensure consumers no longer pay for wasted energy or the harm its emissions can cause.''

Republicans call the methane fee a tax that could raise the price of natural gas. “This proposal means increased costs for employers and higher energy bills for millions of Americans,” said Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-West Virginia.

The American Petroleum Institute, the oil and gas industry's largest lobbying group, slammed the proposal Friday and called for Congress to repeal it.

“As the world looks to U.S. energy producers to provide stability in an increasingly unstable world, this punitive tax increase is a serious misstep that undermines America’s energy advantage,'' said Dustin Meyer, API's senior vice president of policy, economics and regulatory affairs.

While the group supports “smart” federal methane regulation, the EPA proposal “creates an incoherent, confusing regulatory regime that will only stifle innovation and undermine our ability to meet rising energy demand,'' Meyer said. “We look forward to working with Congress to repeal the IRA’s misguided new tax on American energy.”

Fred Krupp, president of the Environmental Defense Fund, called the proposed fee "common sense,'' adding that oil and gas companies should be held accountable for methane pollution, a primary source of global warming.

In a related development, EPA said it is working with industry and others to improve how methane emissions are reported, citing numerous studies showing that and oil and gas companies have significantly underreported their methane emissions to the EPA under the agency's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program.

The climate law, formally known as the Inflation Reduction Act, established a waste-emissions charge for methane from oil and gas facilities that report emissions of more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year to the EPA. The proposal announced Friday sets out details of how the fee will be implemented, including how exemptions will be applied.

The agency said it expects that over time, fewer oil and gas sites will be charged as they reduce their emissions in compliance with the rule.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

ERCOT to capture big share of U.S. solar power growth through 2027

solar growth

Much of the country’s growth in utility-scale solar power generation will happen in the grid operated by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), according to a new forecast.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) predicts that solar power supplied to the ERCOT grid will jump from 56 billion kilowatt-hours in 2025 to 106 billion kilowatt-hours by the end of 2027. That would be an increase of 89 percent.

In tandem with the rapid embrace of solar power, EIA anticipates battery storage capacity for ERCOT will expand from 15 gigawatts in 2025 to 37 gigawatts by the end of 2027, or 147 percent.

EIA expects utility-scale solar to be the country’s fastest-growing source of power generation from 2025 to 2027. It anticipates that this source will climb from 290 billion kilowatt-hours last year to 424 billion kilowatt-hours next year, or 46 percent.

Based on EIA’s projections, ERCOT’s territory would account for one-fourth of the country’s utility-scale solar power generation by the end of next year.

“Solar power and energy storage are the fastest-growing grid technologies in Texas, and can be deployed more quickly than any other generation resource,” according to the Texas Solar + Storage Association. “In the wholesale market, solar and storage are increasing grid reliability, delivering consumer affordability, and driving tax revenue and income streams into rural Texas.”

Expert: Why Texas must make energy transmission a top priority in 2026

guest column

Texas takes pride in running one of the most dynamic and deregulated energy markets in the world, but conversations about electricity rarely focus on what keeps it moving: transmission infrastructure.

As ERCOT projects unprecedented electricity demand growth and grid operators update their forecasts for 2026, it’s becoming increasingly clear that generation, whether renewable or fossil, is only part of the solution. Transmission buildout and sound governing policy now stand as the linchpin for reliability, cost containment, and long-term resilience in a grid under unprecedented stress.

At the heart of this urgency is one simple thing: demand. Over 2024 and 2025, ERCOT has been breaking records at a pace we haven’t seen before. From January through September of 2025 alone, electricity use jumped more than 5% over the year before, the fastest growth of any major U.S. grid. And it’s not slowing down.

The Energy Information Administration expects demand to climb another 14% in 2026, pushing total consumption to roughly 425 terawatt-hours in just the first nine months. That surge isn’t just about more people moving to Texas or running their homes differently; it’s being driven by massive industrial and technology loads that simply weren’t part of the equation ten years ago.

The most dramatic contributor to that rising demand is large-scale infrastructure such as data centers, cloud computing campuses, crypto mining facilities, and electrified industrial sectors. In the latest ERCOT planning update, more than 233 gigawatts of total “large load” interconnection requests were being tracked, an almost 300% jump over just a year earlier, with more than 70% of those requests tied to data centers.

Imagine hundreds of new power plants requesting to connect to the grid, all demanding uninterrupted power 24/7. That’s the scale of the transition Texas is facing, and it’s one of the major reasons transmission planning is no longer back-of-house policy talk but a central grid imperative.

Yet transmission is complicated, costly, and inherently long-lead. It takes three to six years to build new transmission infrastructure, compared with six to twelve months to add a new load or generation project.

This is where Texas will feel the most tension. Current infrastructure can add customers and power plants quickly, but the lines to connect them reliably take time, money, permitting, and political will.

To address these impending needs, ERCOT wrapped up its 2024 Regional Transmission Plan (RTP) at the end of last year, and the message was pretty clear: we’ve got work to do. The plan calls for 274 transmission projects and about 6,000 miles of new, rebuilt, or upgraded lines just to handle the growth coming our way and keep the lights on.

The plan also suggests upgrading to 765-kilovolt transmission lines, a big step beyond the standard 345-kV system. When you start talking about 765-kilovolt transmission lines, that’s a big leap from what Texas normally uses. Those lines are built to move a massive amount of power over long distances, but they’re expensive and complicated, so they’re only considered when planners expect demand to grow far beyond normal levels. Recommending them is a clear signal that incremental upgrades won’t be enough to keep up with where electricity demand is headed.

There’s a reason transmission is suddenly getting so much attention. ERCOT and just about every industry analyst watching Texas are projecting that electricity demand could climb as high as 218 gigawatts by 2031 if even a portion of the massive queue of large-load projects actually comes online. When you focus only on what’s likely to get built, the takeaway is the same: demand is going to stay well above anything we’ve seen before, driven largely by the steady expansion of data centers, cloud computing, and digital infrastructure across the state.

Ultimately, the decisions Texas makes on transmission investment and the policies that determine how those costs are allocated will shape whether 2026 and the years ahead bring greater stability or continued volatility to the grid. Thoughtful planning can support growth while protecting reliability and affordability, but falling short risks making volatility a lasting feature of Texas’s energy landscape.

Transmission Policy: The Other Half of the Equation

Infrastructure investment delivers results only when paired with policies that allow it to operate efficiently and at scale. Recognizing that markets alone won’t solve these challenges, Texas lawmakers and regulators have started creating guardrails.

For example, Senate Bill 6, now part of state law, aims to improve how large energy consumers are managed on the grid, including new rules for data center operations during emergencies and requirements around interconnection. Data centers may even be required to disconnect under extreme conditions to protect overall system reliability, a novel and necessary rule given their scale.

Similarly, House Bill 5066 changed how load forecasting occurs by requiring ERCOT to include utility-reported projections in its planning processes, ensuring transmission planning incorporates real-world expectations. These policy updates matter because grid planning isn’t just a technical checklist. It’s about making sure investment incentives, permitting decisions, and cost-sharing rules are aligned so Texas can grow its economy without putting unnecessary pressure on consumers.

Without thoughtful policy, we risk repeating past grid management mistakes. For example, if transmission projects are delayed or underfunded while new high-demand loads come online, we could see congestion worsen. If that happens, affordable electricity would be located farther from where it’s needed, limiting access to low-cost power for consumers and slowing overall economic growth. That’s especially critical in regions like Houston, where energy costs are already a hot topic for households and businesses alike.

A 2026 View: Strategy Over Shortage

As we look toward 2026, here are the transmission and policy trends that matter most:

  • Pipeline of Projects Must Stay on Track: ERCOT’s RTP is ambitious, and keeping those 274 projects, thousands of circuit miles, and next-generation 765-kV lines moving is crucial for reliability and cost containment.
  • Large Load Forecasting Must Be Nuanced: The explosion in large-load interconnection requests, whether or not every project materializes, signals demand pressure that transmission planners cannot ignore. Building lines ahead of realized demand is not wasteful planning; it’s insurance against cost and reliability breakdowns.
  • Policy Frameworks Must Evolve: Laws like SB 6 and HB 5066 are just the beginning. Texas needs transparent rules for cost allocation, interconnection standards, and emergency protocols that keep consumers protected while supporting innovation and economic growth.
  • Coordination Among Stakeholders Is Critical: Transmission doesn’t stop at one utility’s borders. Regional cooperation among utilities, ERCOT, and local stakeholders is essential to manage congestion and develop systemwide reliability solutions.

Here’s the bottom line: Generation gets the headlines, but transmission makes the grid work. Without a robust transmission buildout and thoughtful governance, even the most advanced generation mix that includes wind, solar, gas, and storage will struggle to deliver the reliability Texans expect at a price they can afford.

In 2026, Texas is not merely testing its grid’s capacity to produce power; it’s testing its ability to move that power where it’s needed most. How we rise to meet that challenge will define the next decade of energy in the Lone Star State.

———

Sam Luna is director at BKV Energy, where he oversees brand and go-to-market strategy, customer experience, marketing execution, and more.