Texas doesn’t have a rule to capture escaping methane emissions from energy infrastructure. Photo via Getty Images

The first year of President Trump’s second term has seen an aggressive rollback of federal environmental protections, which advocacy groups fear will bring more pollution, higher health risks, and less information and power for Texas communities, especially in heavily industrial and urban areas.

Within Trump’s first 100 days in office, his new Environmental Protection Agency administrator, Lee Zeldin, announced a sweeping slate of 31 deregulatory actions. The list, which Zeldin called the agency’s “greatest day of deregulation,” targeted everything from soot standards and power plant pollution rules to the Endangerment Finding, the legal and scientific foundation that obligates the EPA to regulate climate-changing pollution under the Clean Air Act.

Since then, the agency froze research grants, shrank its workforce, and removed some references to climate change and environmental justice from its website — moves that environmental advocates say send a clear signal: the EPA’s new direction will come at the expense of public health.

Cyrus Reed, conservation director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, said Texas is one of the states that feels EPA policy changes directly because the state has shown little interest in stepping up its environmental enforcement as the federal government scales back.

“If we were a state that was open to doing our own regulations there’d be less impact from these rollbacks,” Reed said. “But we’re not.”

“Now we have an EPA that isn’t interested in enforcing its own rules,” he added.

Richard Richter, a spokesperson at the state’s environmental agency, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, said in a statement that the agency takes protecting public health and natural resources seriously and acts consistently and quickly to enforce federal and state environmental laws when they’re violated.

Methane rules put on pause

A major EPA move centers on methane, a potent greenhouse gas that traps heat far more efficiently than carbon dioxide over the short term. It accounts for roughly 16% of global greenhouse gas emissions and is a major driver of climate change. In the U.S., the largest source of methane emissions is the energy sector, especially in Texas, the nation’s top oil and gas producer.

In 2024, the Biden administration finalized long-anticipated rules requiring oil and gas operators to sharply reduce methane emissions from wells, pipelines, and storage facilities. The rule, developed with industry input, targeted leaks, equipment failures, and routine flaring, the burning off of excess natural gas at the wellhead.

Under the rule, operators would have been required to monitor emissions, inspect sites with gas-imaging cameras for leaks, and phase out routine flaring. States are required to come up with a plan to implement the rule, but Texas has yet to do so. Under Trump’s EPA, that deadline has been extended until January 2027 — an 18-month postponement.

Texas doesn’t have a rule to capture escaping methane emissions from energy infrastructure. Richter, the TCEQ spokesperson, said the agency continues to work toward developing the state plan.

Adrian Shelley, Texas director of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said the rule represented a rare moment of alignment between environmentalists and major oil and gas producers.

“I think the fossil fuel industry generally understood that this was the direction the planet and their industry was moving,” he said. Shelley said uniform EPA rules provided regulatory certainty for changes operators saw as inevitable.

Reed, the Sierra Club conservation director, said the delay of methane rules means Texas still has no plan to reduce emissions, while neighboring New Mexico already has imposed its own state methane emission rules that require the industry to detect and repair methane leaks and ban routine venting and flaring.

These regulations have cut methane emissions in the New Mexico portion of the Permian Basin — the oil-rich area that covers West Texas and southeast New Mexico — to half that of Texas, according to a recent data analysis by the Environmental Defense Fund. That’s despite New Mexico doubling production since 2020.

A retreat from soot standards

Fine particulate matter or PM 2.5, one of six pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act, has been called by researchers the deadliest form of air pollution.

In 2024, the EPA under President Biden strengthened air rules for particulate matter by lowering the annual limit from 12 to 9 micrograms per cubic meter. It was the first update since 2012 and one of the most ambitious pieces of Biden’s environmental agenda, driven by mounting evidence that particulate pollution is linked to premature death, heart disease, asthma, and other respiratory illnesses.

After the rule was issued, 24 Republican-led states, including Kentucky and West Virginia, sued to revert to the weaker standard. Texas filed a separate suit asking to block the rule’s recent expansion.

State agencies are responsible for enforcing the federal standards. The TCEQ is charged with creating a list of counties that exceed the federal standard and submitting those recommendations to Gov. Greg Abbott, who then finalizes the designations and submits them to the EPA.

Under the 9 microgram standard, parts of Texas, including Dallas, Harris (which includes Houston), Tarrant (Fort Worth), and Bowie (Texarkana) counties, were in the process of being designated nonattainment areas — which, when finalized, would trigger a legal requirement for the state to develop a plan to clean up the air.

That process stalled after Trump returned to office. Gov. Greg Abbott submitted his designations to EPA last February, but EPA has not yet acted on his designations, according to Richter, the TCEQ spokesperson.

In a court filing last year, the Trump EPA asked a federal appeals court to vacate the stricter standard, bypassing the traditional notice and comment administrative process.

For now, the rule technically remains in effect, but environmental advocates say the EPA’s retreat undermines enforcement of the rule and signals to polluters that it may be short-lived.

Shelley, with Public Citizen, believes the PM2.5 rule would have delivered the greatest health benefit of any EPA regulation affecting Texas, particularly through reductions in diesel pollution from trucks.

“I still hold out hope that it will come back,” he said.

Unraveling the climate framework

Beyond individual pollutants, the Trump EPA has moved to dismantle the federal architecture for addressing climate change.

Among the proposals is eliminating the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, which requires power plants, refineries, and oil and gas suppliers to report annual emissions. The proposal has drawn opposition from both environmental groups and industry, which relies on the data for planning and compliance.

Colin Leyden, Texas state director and energy lead at the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund, said eliminating the program could hurt Texas industry. If methane emissions are no longer reported, then buyers and investors of natural gas, for example, won’t have an official way to measure how much methane pollution is associated with that gas, according to Leyden. That makes it harder to judge how “clean” or “climate-friendly” the product is, which international buyers are increasingly demanding.

“This isn’t just bad for the planet,” he said. “It makes the Texas industry less competitive.”

The administration also proposed last year rescinding the Endangerment Finding, issued in 2009, which obligates the EPA to regulate climate pollution. Most recently, the EPA said it will stop calculating how much money is saved in health care costs as a result of air pollution regulations that curb particulate matter 2.5 and ozone, a component of smog. Both can cause respiratory and health problems.

Leyden said tallying up the dollar value of lives saved when evaluating pollution rules is a foundational principle of the EPA since its creation.

“That really erodes the basic idea that (the EPA) protects health and safety and the environment,” he said.

___

This story was originally published by The Texas Tribune and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.

Trump and Republicans in Congress say the rate reset will boost energy production, jobs and affordability. Photo via Getty Images

States brace for Trump's push to make oil drilling cheap again

Energy news

A Republican push to make drilling cheaper on federal land is creating new fiscal pressure for states that depend on oil and gas revenue, most notably in New Mexico as it expands early childhood education and saves for the future.

The shift stems from the sweeping law President Donald Trump signed in July that rolls back the minimum federal royalty rate to 12.5%. That rate — the share of production value companies must pay to the government — held steady for a century under the 1920 Mineral Leasing Act. It was raised to 16.7% under the Biden administration in 2022.

Trump and Republicans in Congress say the rate reset will boost energy production, jobs and affordability as the administration clears the way for expanded drilling and mining on public lands.

States receive nearly half the money collected through federal royalties, depending on where production takes place. The environment and economics research group Resources for the Future estimates a roughly $6 billion drop in collections over the coming decade.

The stakes are highest in New Mexico, the largest recipient of federal mineral lease payments. The state could could forgo $1.7 billion by 2035 and as much as $5.1 billion by 2050, according to calculations by economist Brian Prest at Resources for the Future.

More than one-third of the general fund budget in the Democratically-led state is tied to the oil and gas industry.

“New Mexico’s impact is way bigger than Wyoming or Colorado or North Dakota,” Prest said, “and that’s just because that’s where the action is on new development.”

The effects will unfold gradually, since federal leases allow a 10-year window to begin drilling and production. Still, state officials say they're already prepping for leaner years.

“It all hurts when you’re losing revenues," said Democratic state Sen. George Muñoz of Gallup, who said lawmakers still hope to invest more in mental health care and support Medicaid, even if federal royalty payments decline. “We’ve learned that until the chicken’s got feathers, we’re not even looking at it."

The higher federal royalty rate was in place for roughly three years while leasing activity was muted, Prest said. New Mexico budget forecasters never tallied the additional income.

New Mexico's nest-egg strategy

A nearly five-fold surge in local oil production since 2017 on federal and state land in New Mexico delivered a financial windfall for state government, helping fund higher teacher salaries, tuition-free college, universal free school meals and more.

The state set aside billions of dollars in investment trusts for future spending in case the world’s thirst for oil falters, including a early childhood education fund to help expand preschool, child care subsidies and home wellness visits for pregnancies and infants.

The state's investment nest egg has grown to $64 billion, second only to Alaska's Permanent Fund. Earnings from the trusts are New Mexico's second-biggest source for general fund spending.

That sturdy financial footing shaped a defiant response to this year’s federal government shutdown, when lawmakers voted to subsidize the state’s Affordable Care Act exchange, cover food assistance and backfill cuts to public broadcasting.

But lawmakers reviewing state finances learned that predictable income fell 1.6% — the first contraction since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Muñoz said matters would be worse if the state had not raised its own royalty rates this year to 25%, from 20%, for new leases on prime oil and gas tracts, while ending a sales moratorium, under legislation he co-sponsored this year.

Encouraged in Alaska

After New Mexico, the states receiving the most federal oil and gas royalties are Wyoming, Louisiana, North Dakota and Texas.

Texas, the nation’s top oil producer, shares the bountiful Permian Basin with New Mexico but has far less federal land and therefore less exposure to changes in royalty policy.

In Alaska, state officials say they are encouraged by the royalty cut, seeing potential for increased development in places like the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, where the massive Willow project — approved in 2023 and now under development — is viewed by some as a catalyst for further activity. The reserve is expected to hold its first lease sales since 2019.

“If reduced federal royalty rates stimulate new leasing, exploration and production, that also could increase other kinds of revenue,” said Lorraine Henry, a spokesperson for Alaska’s Department of Natural Resources.

In North Dakota, federal royalties are split evenly between the state and county governments where drilling occurs. State Office of Management and Budget Director Joe Morrissette said the industry’s future remains difficult to forecast.

“There are so many variables, including timing, price, availability of desirable tracts, and federal policies regarding exploration activities,” Morrissette said.

A federal judge has thrown out President Trump's executive order blocking wind energy development, calling it 'arbitrary and capricious.' Photo by Moritz Lange via Unsplash.

Federal judge strikes Trump order blocking wind energy development

wind win

In a win for clean energy and wind projects in Texas and throughout the U.S., a federal judge struck down President Donald Trump’s “Day One” executive order that blocked wind energy development on federal lands and waters, the Associated Press reports.

Judge Patti Saris of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts vacated Trump’s executive order from Jan. 20, declaring it unlawful and calling it “arbitrary and capricious.”

The challenge was led by a group of state attorneys general from 17 states and Washington, D.C., which was led by New York Attorney General Letitia James. The coalition pushed back against Trump's order , arguing that the administration didn’t have the authority to halt project permitting, and that efforts would critically impact state economies, the energy industry, public health and climate relief efforts.

White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers told the Associated Press that wind projects were given unfair treatment during the Biden Administration and cited that the rest of the energy industry suffered from regulations.

According to the American Clean Power Association, wind is the largest source of renewable energy in the U.S. It provides 10 percent of the electricity generated—and growing. Texas leads the nation in wind electricity generation, accounting for 28 percent of the U.S. total in 2024, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Several clean-energy initiatives have been disrupted by recent policy changes, impacting Houston projects.

The Biden era Inflation Reduction Act’s 10-year hydrogen incentive was shortened under Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, prompting ExxonMobil to pause its Baytown low-carbon hydrogen project. That project — and two others in the Houston region — also lost federal support as part of a broader $700 million cancellation tied to DOE cuts.

Meanwhile, Texas House Democrats have urged the administration to restore a $250 million Solar for All grant that would have helped low-income households install solar panels.

Houston U.S. representatives and others from Texas are pushing the Trump administration to reinstate a portion of the $7 billion Biden-era Solar for All program, which aimed to help low-income families reduce their energy costs.. Photo via Pixabay

Texas House Democrats urge Trump administration to restore $250M solar grant

solar grants

Eight Democratic members of the U.S. House from Texas, including two from Houston, are calling on the Trump administration to restore a nearly $250 million solar energy grant for Texas that’s being slashed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

In a letter to Lee Zeldin, head of the EPA, and Russell Vought, director of the federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the House members urged the two officials to reinstate the nearly $250 million grant, which was awarded to Texas under the $7 billion Biden-era Solar for All program. The Texas grant was designed to assist 28,000 low-income households in installing solar panels, aiming to reduce their energy bills.

“This administration has improperly withheld billions in congressionally appropriated funding that was intended to benefit everyday Americans,” the letter stated.

The letter claimed that numerous court rulings have determined the EPA cannot repeal already allocated funding.

“Congress made a commitment to families, small businesses, and communities across this country to lower their utility bills and reduce harmful pollution through investments in clean energy. The Solar for All program was part of that commitment, and the EPA’s actions to rescind this funding effectively undermine that congressional intent,” the House members wrote.

The six House members who signed the letter are:

  • U.S. Rep. Sylvia Garcia of Houston
  • U.S. Rep. Al Green of Houston
  • U.S. Rep. Greg Casar of Austin
  • U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Dallas
  • U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Austin
  • U.S. Rep. Julie Johnson of Dallas
  • U.S. Rep. Marc Veasey of Fort Worth

The nearly $250 million grant was awarded last year to the Harris County-led Texas Solar for All Coalition.

In a post on the X social media platform, Zeldin said the recently passed “One Big Beautiful Bill” killed the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, which would have financed the $7 billion Solar for All program.

“The bottom line is this: EPA no longer has the statutory authority to administer the program or the appropriated funds to keep this boondoggle alive,” Zeldin said.

The Lone Star State is losing a nearly $250 million grant awarded last year to the Harris County-led Texas Solar for All Coalition. Photo via Getty Images.

EPA scraps $7B solar program, stripping Texas of hundreds of millions in clean energy funds

funding cut

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is ending a $7 billion Biden-era program that was supposed to enable low-income Americans to access affordable solar power. The program, which EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin called a “boondoggle,” would have benefited more than 900,000 U.S. households.

In line with the EPA’s action, the Lone Star State is losing a $249.7 million grant awarded last year to the Harris County-led Texas Solar for All Coalition. The grant money would have equipped more than 46,000 low-income and disadvantaged communities and households in Texas with residential solar power. The nonprofit Solar United Neighbors organization said Texas had already begun to roll out this initiative.

Also slipping out of Texas’ hands are:

  • A more than $156 million 19-state grant awarded to the Clean Energy Fund of Texas in partnership with the Bullard Center for Environmental and Climate Justice at Houston’s Texas Southern University. The Clean Energy Fund is a Houston-based “green bank” that backs investments in solar and wind power.
  • Part of a $249.3 million multistate grant awarded to the Community Power Coalition’s Powering America Together Program. The nonprofit Inclusive Prosperity Capital organization leads the coalition.
  • Part of a $249.8 million multistate grant awarded to the Solar Access for Nationwide Affordable Housing Program, led by the nonprofit GRID Alternatives organization.

In a post on the X social media platform, Zeldin said the recently passed “One Big Beautiful Bill” killed the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, which would have financed the $7 billion Solar for All program.

“The bottom line is this: EPA no longer has the statutory authority to administer the program or the appropriated funds to keep this boondoggle alive,” Zeldin said.

Anya Schoolman, executive director of Washington, D.C.-based Solar United Neighbors, accused the EPA of illegally terminating the Solar for All program. She said ending the program “harms families struggling with rising energy costs and will cost us good local jobs.”

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, joined Schoolman in alleging the EPA’s “outrageous” action is illegal. Sanders introduced the legislation that established the Solar for All program.

The senator lashed out at President Trump for axing the program in order “to protect the obscene profits of his friends in the oil and gas industry.”

A new EO could streamline regulatory burdens for the development of data centers supporting AI. Getty Images

Energy experts: Executive order enhances federal permitting for AI data centers

Guest column

In an effort to accelerate the development of artificial intelligence, President Trump signed an executive order (EO) aimed at expediting the federal permitting process for data centers, particularly those supporting AI inference, training, simulation, or synthetic data generation.

Following the White House’s issuance of a broader AI Action Plan, the EO seeks to streamline regulatory burdens and utilize federal resources to encourage the development of data centers supporting AI, as well as the physical components and energy infrastructure needed to construct and provide power to these data centers.

Qualifying Projects

The EO directs several federal agencies to take actions to incentivize the development of “Qualifying Projects,” which the EO defines as “Data Centers” and “Covered Component Projects.” The EO defines “Data Center Projects” as facilities that require over 100 megawatts (MW) of new load dedicated to AI inference, training, simulation, or synthetic data generation. The EO defines Covered Component Projects as materials, products, and infrastructure that are required to build Data Center Projects or upon which Data Center Projects depend, including energy infrastructure projects like transmission lines and substations, dispatchable base load energy sources like natural gas, geothermal, and nuclear used principally to power Data Center Projects, and semiconductors and related equipment. For eligibility as a Qualifying Project, the project sponsor must commit at least $500 million in capital expenditures. Data Center Projects and Covered Component Projects may also meet the definition of Qualifying Project if they protect national security or are otherwise designated as Qualifying Projects by the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of Commerce, or Secretary of Energy.

Streamlining Permitting of Qualifying Projects

The EO outlines the following strategies aimed at improving the efficiency of environmental reviews and permitting for Qualifying Projects:

  • NEPA Applicability: The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), in coordination with relevant agencies, is directed to utilize existing and new categorical exclusions under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to cover actions related to Qualifying Projects, which “normally do not have a significant effect on the human environment.” The EO states that where federal financial assistance represents less than 50 percent of total project costs of a Qualifying Project, the Project shall be presumed not to be a “major Federal action” requiring NEPA review.
  • FAST-41: The Executive Director of the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council (FPISC) is empowered to designate a Qualifying Project as a “transparency project” under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST-41) and expedite its transition from a transparency project to a “covered project” under FAST-41. FPISC is directed to consider all available options to designate a Qualifying Project as a FAST-41 covered project, even where the Qualifying Project may not be eligible.
  • EPA Permitting: The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is directed to modify applicable regulations under several environmental protection statutes impacting the development of Qualifying Projects on federal and non-federal lands. EPA is also directed to develop guidance to expedite environmental reviews for identification and reuse of Brownfield and Superfund Sites suitable for Qualifying Projects. Importantly, state environmental permitting agencies are not subject to the EO.
  • Corps Permitting: The US Army Corps of Engineers is directed to review the nationwide permits issued under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 to determine whether an activity-specific nationwide permit is needed to facilitate the efficient permitting of activities related to Qualifying Projects.
  • Interior Permitting: The US Department of the Interior is directed to consult with the US Department of Commerce regarding the streamlining of Endangered Species Act consultations for Qualifying Projects, and to work with the US Department of Energy to identify federal lands that may be available for use by Qualifying Projects and offer appropriate authorizations to project sponsors.

Federal Incentives for Qualifying Projects

The EO also directs the US Secretary of Commerce to “launch an initiative to provide financial support for Qualifying Projects,” which may include loans, grants, tax incentives, and offtake agreements. The EO further directs all “relevant agencies” to identify and submit to the White House Office of Office of Science and Technology Policy any relevant existing financial support that can be used to assist Qualifying Projects, consistent with the protection of national security.

The EO reinforces the Trump administration’s focus on AI and creates new opportunities for both AI data center developers and energy infrastructure companies providing power or project components to these data centers. Proactive engagement with relevant agencies will be crucial for capitalizing on the opportunities created by this EO and the broader AI Action Plan. By leveraging these financial and environmental incentives, project developers may be able to shorten permitting timelines, reduce costs, and take advantage of federal financial support.

---

Jason B. Hutt, Taylor M. Stuart and Anouk Nouet are lawyers at Bracewell. Hutt is chair of the firm’s environment, lands and resources department. Stuart counsels energy, infrastructure, and industrial clients on matters involving environmental and natural resources law and policy. Nouet advises clients on litigation, enforcement and project development matters with a focus on complex environmental and natural resources law and policy.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Houston startup raises $6M to grow AI platform for solar, battery contractors

fresh funding

Houston tech startup Artemis has raised $6 million from 10 investors. The company offers an AI-supported platform that enables solar, battery storage and home improvement contractors to design, sell and finance energy projects.

Long Journey and Copec WIND Ventures co-led the round, with participation from angel investor Scott Banister, Coalition Operators, FJ Labs, Ludlow Ventures, Palm Tree Crew, Plug and Play Ventures, Shrug Capital and Tribeca Ventures.

To help propel growth, the company secured $10 million in financing last year (under its previous name, Monalee) from venture debt and growth credit provider Applied Real Intelligence. As Monalee, the company raised $16 million in venture capital.

The company was founded in 2022 as an installer of solar and battery storage projects. Five years later, the startup used in-house technology to establish its standalone software platform as it began pivoting away from installation. The company recently adopted the Artemis brand name.

Artemis says its platform saves time and money for installers of residential solar, battery storage, and energy projects. The platform combines an AI-powered design tool with embedded financing capabilities and compliance automation to create a single operating system.

The company says its customers report as much as a 72 percent reduction in software costs and up to 98 percent faster turnaround times. Thus far, more than 100 installers are using Artemis’ technology.

“Installers shouldn’t need six tools and a week of back-and-forth to sell a project," Walid Halty, co-founder and CEO of Artemis, said in a press release. “This funding gives us the fuel to scale our mission to compress design, financing, and compliance into a single flow so every installer can operate like a modern energy company. We’re not just speeding up deals, we're modernizing how distributed energy gets built.”

The Artemis platform, now available in the U.S. and soon to be launched in Latin America, caters to home improvement contractors, solar companies, lenders, and utilities.

“Artemis is transforming the complexity of distributed energy into elegant simplicity," added Arielle Zuckerberg, general partner at Long Journey.

Houston researchers propose model to scale e-waste recycling

critical research

The “missing link” in critical minerals may have been in our junk drawers all along, according to new research from the University of Houston.

Jian Shi, an associate professor in the UH Cullen College of Engineering, and his team have unveiled a new supply chain model that aims to make e-waste economically viable and could help make large-scale recycling possible.

Shi, along with professor Kailai Wang and graduate researcher Chuyue Wang, published the work in a recent issue of Nature. Their study outlines how gold, lithium and cobalt from discarded electronics can be kept circulating in the U.S. through the process of “urban mining.” It was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) through the Vehicle Technologies Office.

The team’s research found that e-waste is the fastest-growing solid waste stream in the world. When waste from smartphones or tablets is left unmanaged, the devices can leak hazardous waste and pose significant fire risks due to aging batteries. Additionally, when they are shipped off to foreign landfills, the U.S. loses the potential to recycle or reuse the critical minerals left inside.

“A lot of people have iPads or old iPhones sitting in their drawers right now, and that’s a waste of a critical resource,” Shi said in a news release. “Urban mining allows us to extract the same high-value materials found in traditional mines without the environmental destruction. More importantly, it helps secure our domestic supply chain for the technologies of tomorrow.”

According to UH, recycling e-waste has not succeeded in the U.S. due to a fragmented recycling system, in which manufacturers, collectors and recyclers operate separately, driving up costs.

The UH team's research looks to change that.

In the study, the researchers modeled streamlined recycling efforts by mapping the interactions between manufacturers and independent recycling markets. Their dual-channel closed-loop supply chain (CLSC) model identified how these players can transition from competitors to partners, which can distribute profits more equitably and make recycling efforts more financially attractive.

According to UH, the research has particular significance due to the growing demand for electronic vehicles and their batteries.

“We can improve the performance of the entire recycling ecosystem and make the profit distribution more balanced,” Wang said in the release. “This ensures that the materials we need for EVs and advanced electronics stay right here in the U.S.”

“By making recycling work at scale, we aren’t just cleaning up waste,” Shi added. “We’re building a foundation that benefits both our national security and our economy.”

1PointFive signs latest deal, shares update on $1.3B carbon removal project

DAC deal

Houston-based 1PointFive, a subsidiary of Occidental Petroleum Corp., has secured another buyer of carbon dioxide removal credits for its $1.3 billion STRATOS project as it moves toward operation.

Bain & Company, a Boston-based consulting firm, has agreed to purchase 9,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) credits from the direct air capture (DAC) facility over three years, according to a news release. DAC technology pulls CO2 from the air at any location, not just where carbon dioxide is emitted.

The deal is Bain's first purchase of DAC removal credits. The company has developed a program that helps clients purchase carbon credits from a range of carbon-removal technologies.

"We are proud to partner with 1PointFive and add them to our portfolio of engineered carbon removal technologies," Sam Israelit, Bain’s chief sustainability officer, said in the news release. "Their track record for developing DAC technology, coupled with their deep understanding of what it takes to deliver large-scale infrastructure projects, uniquely positions them to be a leader in this emerging segment.”

“We believe this agreement demonstrates continued momentum for the solution while supporting the development of vital domestic infrastructure,” Anthony Cottone, president and general manager of 1PointFive, added in the release.

Bain joins others like Microsoft, Amazon, AT&T, Airbus, the Houston Astros and the Houston Texans that have agreed to buy CDR credits from STRATOS.

The Texas-based STRATOS project is being developed through a joint venture with investment manager BlackRock and is designed to capture up to 500,000 metric tons of CO2 per year. The U.S Environmental Protection Agency approved Class VI permits for the project last year.

1PointFive says STRATOS is "progressing through start-up activities." The company shared in a LinkedIn post that Phase 1 of the project is expected to go online in Q2, with Phase 2 ramping up through the remainder of 2026.