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

These are the most-read guest columns from Houston energy experts in 2024

year in review

Editor's note: As the year comes to a close, EnergyCapital is looking back at the year's top stories of Houston energy transition. From business advice to industry observations, these are five of the most-read pieces from experts in the industry. Make sure to click through the links below to read the full story.

Expert weighs in on fire protection standards in hydrogen industry growth

With the projected uptick of new hydrogen production projects, an expert explores hydrogen fire protection, reflects on the measures and standards established to mitigate risks, and more. Photo courtesy

Written by Stuart Bradbury, PPG business development manager of Fire Protection, Protective and Marine Coatings.

As First State Hydrogen continues to advance its groundbreaking clean hydrogen production facility in the U.S., the spotlight intensifies as hydrogen becomes an increasingly key player in the energy transition.

With the projected uptick of new hydrogen production and handling projects, let's explore hydrogen fire protection, reflect on the measures and standards established to mitigate risks, and ensure that the hydrogen economy thrives. Continue reading.

Unlocking climate tech’s potential in Houston: What health innovation's rise can teach us

If we can channel the same sense of urgency and public commitment toward climate change as we did for health crises in the past, climate tech could overcome its current obstacles. Photo via Getty Images

Written by Nada Ahmed, founding partner at Houston-based Energy Tech Nexus, a startup hub for the energy transition.

Over the past several decades, climate tech has faced numerous challenges, ranging from inconsistent public support to a lack of funding from cautious investors. While grassroots organizations and climate innovators have made notable efforts to address urgent environmental issues, we have yet to see large-scale, lasting impact.

A common tendency is to compare climate tech to the rapid advancements made in digital and software technology, but perhaps a more appropriate parallel is the health tech sector, which encountered many of the same struggles in its early days.

Observing the rise of health tech and the economic and political support it received, we can uncover strategies that could stabilize and propel climate tech forward. Continue reading.

Column: Should companies pay for EV chargers for corporate fleets?

By taking a thoughtful approach to employees’ individual situations, fleet managers can design a take-home EV program that fits their drivers’ needs and benefits the company’s bottom line in the long run. Photo via Getty Images

Written by David Lewis, founder and CEO of MoveEV.

As electric vehicles continue to rise in popularity among corporate fleets, the question of how to best accommodate charging needs for fleet drivers, especially those taking their vehicles home, is becoming increasingly important.

Charging EV fleet vehicles at home can be an excellent strategy to save employees time and cut operational costs. However, many companies hesitate in their take-home EV implementation, mistakenly believing that high-cost level 2 home chargers are a necessity. This misconception can stall the transition to an efficient, cost-effective fleet charging solution.

By taking a thoughtful approach to employees’ individual situations, fleet managers can design a take-home EV program that fits their drivers’ needs and benefits the company’s bottom line in the long run. Continue reading.

Uniquely Houston event to convene innovation experts across aerospace, energy, and medicine

For the eighteenth year in a row, the annual Pumps & Pipes event will showcase and explore convergence innovation and common technology themes across Houston’s three major industries. Image courtesy of Pumps & Pipes

Written by Stuart Corr, director of innovation engineering at The Bookout Center at Houston Methodist and executive director of Pumps & Pipes.

Every year, Houston's legacy industries — energy, medicine, and aerospace — come together to share innovative ideas and collaborate on future opportunities.

For the eighteenth year in a row, the annual Pumps & Pipes event will showcase and explore convergence innovation and common technology themes across Houston’s three major industries. The hosting organization, also called Pumps & Pipes, was established in 2007 in Houston and is dedicated to fostering collaboration amongst the city's three major industries.

With NASA in its backyard, the world’s largest medical center, and a reputation as the “Energy Capital of the World,” Houston is uniquely positioned to lead in cross-industry convergence innovation and is reflected in the theme of this year’s event – Blueprint Houston: Converge and Innovate. Continue reading.

Op-Ed: To protect the Texas grid, help Texans protect themselves

This latest incident is more than a sign that Houstonians must take control of their power. Photo by Eric Turnquist

Written by Bret Biggart, CEO of Freedom Solar Power, a Texas-based solar company.

On the evening of May 16, a devastating “derecho” storm howled through Houston. Nearly 800,000 customers lost power. Many were still without electricity days later, as a heat wave baked neighborhoods that couldn’t power air conditioners.

It was yet another unwelcome reminder about the precariousness of the power grid.

These outages followed repeated grid warnings, conservation calls, and near-misses last summer and the summer before, as well as the catastrophic Winter Storm Uri freeze in February 2021.

The outages also preceded the increasingly extreme weather Texas faces and staggering growth on the ERCOT grid: after growing about 1 percent a year for 20 years, the power grid covering most of Texas may need to be 78 percent bigger by 2030.

So, this latest incident is more than a sign that Houstonians must take control of their power. It also shows that more and more, the state needs you to act. Continue reading.

Houston company to develop game-changing lithium-sulfur EV batteries for automaker

team work

Houston-based Zeta Energy Corp. has teamed up with an automaker to develop new battery technology.

Zeta Energy and Stellantis N.V. announced a joint development deal to advance battery cell technology for electric vehicle applications that will develop lithium-sulfur EV batteries with gravimetric energy density that can achieve a volumetric energy density comparable to today’s lithium-ion technology. The batteries are targeted to power Stellantis electric vehicles by 2030.

“The combination of Zeta Energy’s lithium-sulfur battery technology with Stellantis’ unrivaled expertise in innovation, global manufacturing and distribution can dramatically improve the performance and cost profile of electric vehicles while increasing the supply chain resiliency for batteries and EVs,” Tom Pilette, CEO of Zeta Energy, says in a news release.

The batteries will be produced using waste materials and methane that boasts lower CO2 emissions than any existing battery technology. Zeta Energy battery technology is intended to be manufacturable within existing gigafactory technology and would leverage an entire domestic supply chain in Europe or North America.

The technology can lead to a significantly lighter battery pack with the same usable energy as contemporary lithium-ion batteries. The companies believe this will enable greater range, improved handling and enhanced performance. The technology has the potential to improve fast-charging speed by up to 50 percent, which can make EV ownership easier.

Lithium-sulfur batteries are expected to cost less than half the price per kilowatt of current lithium-ion batteries according to a news release. Zeta has more than 60 patents on its proprietary lithium-sulfur anode and cathode technologies.

Lighter and more compact EV batteries have become an important design goal for vehicle designers and manufacturers. This objective is similar to what General Motors is doing with prismatic cell technology with LG Energy Solution.

“Our collaboration with Zeta Energy is another step in helping advance our electrification strategy as we work to deliver clean, safe and affordable vehicles,” Ned Curic, Stellantis chief engineering and technology officer, says in the release. “Groundbreaking battery technologies like lithium-sulfur can support Stellantis’ commitment to carbon neutrality by 2038 while ensuring our customers enjoy optimal range, performance and affordability.”

Last year, Zeta Energy announced that it was selected to receive $4 million in federal funding for the development of efficient electric vehicle batteries from the U.S. Department of Energy's ARPA-E Electric Vehicles for American Low-Carbon Living, or EVs4ALL, program.

Judge once again rejects Texas-based Tesla's multi-billion-dollar pay package for Elon Musk — now what?

hard no

For a second time, a Delaware judge has nullified a pay package that Tesla had awarded its CEO, Elon Musk, that once was valued at $56 billion.

Last week, Chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick turned aside a request from Musk's lawyers to reverse a ruling she announced in January that had thrown out the compensation plan. The judge ruled then that Musk effectively controlled Tesla's board and had engineered the outsize pay package during sham negotiations.

Lawyers for a Tesla shareholder who sued to block the pay package contended that shareholders who had voted for the 10-year plan in 2018 had been given misleading and incomplete information.

In their defense, Tesla's board members asserted that the shareholders who ratified the pay plan a second time in June had done so after receiving full disclosures, thereby curing all the problems the judge had cited in her January ruling. As a result, they argued, Musk deserved the pay package for having raised Tesla's market value by billions of dollars.

McCormick rejected that argument. In her 103-page opinion, she ruled that under Delaware law, Tesla's lawyers had no grounds to reverse her January ruling “based on evidence they created after trial.”

What will Musk and Tesla do now?

On Monday night, Tesla posted on X, the social media platform owned by Musk, that the company will appeal. The appeal would be filed with the Delaware Supreme Court, the only state appellate court Tesla can pursue. Experts say a ruling would likely come in less than a year.

“The ruling, if not overturned, means that judges and plaintiffs' lawyers run Delaware companies rather than their rightful owners — the shareholders,” Tesla argued.

Later, on X, Musk unleashed a blistering attack on the judge, asserting that McCormick is “a radical far left activist cosplaying as a judge.”

What do experts say about the case?

Legal authorities generally suggest that McCormick’s ruling was sound and followed the law. Charles Elson, founding director of the Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware, said that in his view, McCormick was right to rule that after Tesla lost its case in the original trial, it created improper new evidence by asking shareholders to ratify the pay package a second time.

Had she allowed such a claim, he said, it would cause a major shift in Delaware’s laws against conflicts of interest given the unusually close relationship between Musk and Tesla’s board.

“Delaware protects investors — that’s what she did,” said Elson, who has followed the court for more than three decades. “Just because you’re a ‘superstar CEO’ doesn’t put you in a separate category.”

Elson said he thinks investors would be reluctant to put money into Delaware companies if there were exceptions to the law for “special people.”

What will the Delaware Supreme Court do?

Elson said that in his opinion, the court is likely to uphold McCormick's ruling.

Can Tesla appeal to federal courts?

Experts say no. Rulings on state laws are normally left to state courts. Brian Dunn, program director for the Institute of Compensation Studies at Cornell University, said it's been his experience that Tesla has no choice but to stay in the Delaware courts for this compensation package.

Tesla has moved its legal headquarters to Texas. Does that matter?

The company could try to reconstitute the pay package and seek approval in Texas, where it may expect more friendlier judges. But Dunn, who has spent 40 years as an executive compensation consultant, said it's likely that some other shareholder would challenge the award in Texas because it's excessive compared with other CEOs' pay plans.

“If they just want to turn around and deliver him $56 billion, I can't believe somebody wouldn't want to litigate it,” Dunn said. “It's an unconscionable amount of money.”

Would a new pay package be even larger?

Almost certainly. Tesla stock is trading at 15 times the exercise price of stock options in the current package in Delaware, Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas wrote in a note to investors. Tesla's share price has doubled in the past six months, Jonas wrote. At Monday’s closing stock price, the Musk package is now worth $101.4 billion, according to Equilar, an executive data firm.

And Musk has asked for a subsequent pay package that would give him 25 percent of Tesla's voting shares. Musk has said he is uncomfortable moving further into artificial intelligence with the company if he doesn't have 25 percent control. He currently holds about 13 percent of Tesla's outstanding shares.