SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
earthworks
New Report Debunks Industry-Backed Greenwashing Scam of 'Certified Gas'
"Hundreds of hours of on-the-ground research has made it more clear than ever that certifiers are not living up to their claims," one report author said.
Jun 18, 2024
Methane emissions monitors operated by third-party gas certification companies only picked up one of the 23 pollution events detected by anti-extraction group Earthworks.
That's one of the findings in Certified Gaslighting, a report published by Earthworks and Oil Change International on Tuesday that reveals how fossil fuel companies are increasingly turning to private gas certification companies to prove that they are reducing their methane emissions.
The evidence indicates that the "certified gas" label is just another industry smokescreen thrown up by climate arsonists to shield themselves from public pressure.
"'Certified' gas is the industry's latest effort at greenwashing, not an earnest effort at halting the accelerating climate crisis," Dakota Raynes, report author and Earthworks research and policy manager, said in a statement. "Hundreds of hours of on-the-ground research has made it more clear than ever that certifiers are not living up to their claims."
"If we want to stop rising methane emissions, then we must stop the gas certification farce."
For the report, Earthworks carried out 81 surveys at 38 oil and gas sites in Colorado over the course of 10 months in 2023, reviewing both pollution levels and the continuous emissions monitors (CEMS) designed to detect it. While Earthworks detected pollution events during a quarter of its site visits, the CEMs only caught one.
What's more, Earthworks looked at the monitors operated by Project Canary, one of the leading gas-certification companies. The environmental group found that the company's monitors, advertised as "continuous," were actually offline more than 25% of the time.
"Fossil fuel companies are scrambling to maintain relevance amid mounting pressure from communities and climate advocates, so they resort to third-party 'certification' schemes as a last-ditch effort to portray their operations as 'clean,'" Oil Change International research director Lorne Stockman said in a statement. "Our research reveals these certification scams are deceptive, enabling gas companies to expand under the false pretense of emission reductions. This greenwashing scam must end so we can focus on what's urgently needed—phasing out oil and gas."
Tuesday's report builds on a growing body of evidence that "gas certification" is another trick from what Raynes described as the "industry's grab bag of dangerous distractions." While private companies certify almost 40% of U.S. gas, the nation's oil and gas sector emits more methane than any other country's. In 2023, it released 13.8 million metric tons, translating to almost 1.2 billion tons of CO2 equivalent or the emissions of 301 coal plants, according to International Energy Agency figures. Globally, the oil and gas industry spewed more than 79.5 million metric tons of methane last year.
The report also follows previous research from Earthworks and Oil Change, which found that Project Canary monitors failed to detect every pollution event picked up by Earthworks' Optical Gas Imaging cameras.
The fact that the monitors only picked up one Earthworks-detected event a year later "suggests that operators have made minimal changes to monitoring efforts to account for the findings in our report," the authors of Tuesday's report wrote.
The latest report also points out what it terms a "dangerous loophole": The companies are not required by Colorado law or by certification standards to address pollution events that occur due to normal operations as opposed to malfunctions. Yet most of the events detected by Earthworks were part of normal operations.
"These emissions are no less harmful to communities exposed to the pollution nor less impactful with respect to the climate crisis," the authors wrote.
Despite the many problems with the gas-certification process, the industry is rushing to adopt it as the U.S. Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency, and Treasury Department are considering incorporating it into regulations. Some public utilities are also buying certified gas and then charging customers more to deliver it as they claim to make progress on climate goals.
"As they have for decades, the fossil fuel industry is deliberately lying, manipulating, and gaslighting the public," Leah Qusba, executive director for Action for the Climate Emergency, said in a statement. "Before 'certified gas' there was 'next-gen gas,' before that there was 'natural gas,' and before that there was the myth of 'clean coal.' All these fancy terms to hide the truth: Fossil fuels are deadly, and they're stealing our future."
In response to their findings, the report authors recommended that methane-reduction efforts should be carried out under government overview and within a regulatory framework that prioritizes the well-being of communities and consumers. Further, they advised that regulators should not include certification schemes as part of their efforts and that CEMs should be used transparently and in accordance with peer-reviewed best practices and with all of their data made publicly available.
"It's no surprise that the same industry that has spent decades marketing gas as 'safe,' 'clean,' and 'natural' is now looking for new ways to greenwash its product," said Gas Leaks Project executive director James Hadgis. "Third-party gas certification schemes are unable, or unwilling, to capture emissions events that intensify the climate crisis while poisoning nearby communities. If we want to stop rising methane emissions, then we must stop the gas certification farce."
Moreover, the report emphasizes that, while important, simply reducing oil-and-gas methane emissions is not enough. The government must encourage and facilitate a rapid and just transition away from fossil fuels.
This includes resisting the industry push to increase the production and export of liquefied natural gas (LNG). LNG has emerged as a major front in the battle to combat the climate emergency, as the Biden administration has announced a pause on export approvals to assess their impact on the climate and consumers, even as fossil fuel companies and allied politicians protest.
"LNG exports are a certified disaster. No amount of greenwashing changes the fact that continuing to expand fossil fuels will perpetuate harms to our climate and the communities in the path of the fracking industry's drilling pads, pipelines, and export facilities," Jim Walsh, the policy director of Food & Water Watch and Food & Water Action, said in a statement.
"We continue to see major fossil fuel companies move forward plans to increase exports of fracked gas, despite the limited pause on new export approvals," Walsh continued. "The health of our communities and the planet depends on President Biden rejecting these misleading industry certification schemes and starting a real and robust effort to phase out fossil fuels."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Critics Warn Biden $7 Billion for Hydrogen Helps 'Industry Ploy to Rebrand Fracked Gas'
"The Biden administration has clearly fallen for this scam hook, line, and sinker," said one campaigner. "This multibillion-dollar bet on greenwashed dirty energy will undermine efforts to address the climate crisis."
Oct 13, 2023
As U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm on Friday celebrated the "historic investment" of up to $7 billion for seven regional hydrogen hubs as a key to achieving President Joe Biden's "goal of American industry powered by American clean energy," some climate campaigners warned that the administration is falling for—or participating in—a fossil fuel industry scam.
Roughly two-thirds of the H2Hubs investment will go toward green hydrogen, which is made using renewable energy, according to the White House. However, the bipartisan infrastructure legislation Biden signed in 2021 requires broader support, including for pink (nuclear) and blue (gas) hydrogen projects, the latter of which includes carbon capture, utilization, and storage.
"At face value—and according to the Biden playbook—the hydrogen hub grants aim to help transition the United States to clean energy. In reality, they amount to another corporate scam, one that preserves and extends the life of the extractive economy and prevents the frontline communities most impacted by climate disaster from having input," said Marion Gee, co-executive director at the Climate Justice Alliance, representing 89 rural and urban environmental justice groups.
"Hydrogen development is energy intensive to produce, could present a public safety risk in transit, can produce health-damaging air pollution when combusted, and is a play by the fossil fuel industry to extend its viability and profits," Gee stressed. "We must work to move capital and power into the hands of local communities who will center traditional ecological and cultural knowledge and create a pathway toward a regenerative future."
"The fossil fuel industry is working to continue our nation's reliance on fossil fuels by any means necessary—and hydrogen offers yet another possible inroad for Big Oil and Gas."
Earthworks policy director Lauren Pagel also asserted that "prioritizing hydrogen hubs across the United States is more about extending the life of oil and gas companies than addressing the climate crisis. These hubs are a dangerous distraction from the obvious consensus solution that the world must stop expanding fossil fuels that are warming the atmosphere."
Food & Water Watch policy director Jim Walsh was similarly critical, declaring that "the massive build-out of hydrogen infrastructure is little more than an industry ploy to rebrand fracked gas. The Biden administration has clearly fallen for this scam hook, line, and sinker. This multibillion-dollar bet on greenwashed dirty energy will undermine efforts to address the climate crisis, while increasing pollution of our air and water, and milking taxpayers for billions in new fossil fuel subsidies."
"Even the cleanest forms of hydrogen present serious problems—most notably the massive amount of water that would be waste," Walsh added. "As groundwater sources are drying up across the country, there is no reason to waste precious drinking water resources on hydrogen when there are cheaper, cleaner energy sources that can facilitate a real transition off fossil fuels."
The seven selected projects are the Appalachian (West Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania), California, Gulf Coast (Texas), Heartland (Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota), Mid-Atlantic (Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey), Midwest (Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan), and Pacific Northwest (Washington, Oregon, and Montana) hydrogen hubs.
As The New York Timesdetailed:
Not all of the $7 billion in funding will be spent at once. As a first step, the Energy Department will give awardees initial grants to create more detailed proposals for their hydrogen hubs. If the agency deems the projects viable, it will disburse more money over time—but that money is not guaranteed if any of the hubs prove unworkable.
"We're still a long, long ways away from creating a large-scale hydrogen economy," said Alex Kizer, a senior vice president at the Energy Futures Initiative, a Washington nonprofit organization. "Think of these hubs as laboratories of sorts to experiment with potential business models for hydrogen and to try to figure out some of the technological and infrastructure hurdles."
Even groups that support green hydrogen raised concerns over funding longtime polluters. Sierra Club executive director Ben Jealous warned that "the fossil fuel industry is working to continue our nation's reliance on fossil fuels by any means necessary—and hydrogen offers yet another possible inroad for Big Oil and Gas to lock in polluting and noneconomic uses of gas for decades to come."
"Decision-makers in the administration and at the local level must be wary of these attempts and ensure as much hydrogen-specific funding as possible goes to green hydrogen and its most efficient end uses to ensure this investment actually addresses climate change," he said.
Jill Tauber, vice president of litigation for climate and energy at Earthjustice, suggested that "hydrogen can be a clean energy solution, or it can drive us deeper into the climate crisis and hurt communities," and that green projects powered by renewables "can play an important role cleaning up what we cannot electrify, like steel manufacturing."
Julie McNamara, deputy policy director of the Climate and Energy Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, joined the chorus of alarmed critics on Friday, saying that "billions of taxpayer dollars are at risk of perpetuating fossil fuel industry injustices and harms while subsidizing fossil fuel greenwashing."
"Today's announcement also sets in stark relief the significance of upcoming administration decisions around implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act's hydrogen production tax credit, which could be a bulwark against heavily polluting hydrogen—or a backdoor subsidizing it," she noted. "The Department of Energy and the Biden administration now must set rigorous implementation, evaluation, and engagement criteria to ensure the development of a hydrogen industry that is unequivocally aligned with our climate objectives and that serves our collective goal to secure a safe, clean, just, and healthy future for all."
Keep ReadingShow Less
New IEA Warning on Methane Is All Biden Needs to Know to Declare Climate Emergency, Says Group
One campaigner said the IEA report "discredits any attempt to use methane reduction efforts as an excuse to further permit fossil fuel expansion."
Oct 11, 2023
As the International Energy Agency released a report warning that immediate cuts to methane gas pollution caused by fossil fuel production are critical for averting climate catastrophe, an environmental advocacy group on Wednesday said the IEA publication gives U.S. President Joe Biden "sufficient justification to declare a climate emergency."
The IEA report states that "immediate reductions in methane emissions are needed to limit warming to 1.5°C," the more ambitious objective of the Paris agreement.
Methane—which has more than 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide during its first two decades in the atmosphere—is emitted during the production and transportation of oil, gas, and coal, as well as from municipal landfills and livestock.
The report continues:
Rapid cuts in methane emissions from fossil fuels through targeted abatement measures—alongside deep cuts in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions—are essential to achieve global climate targets. Without targeted action on methane, even with deep reductions in fossil fuel use, the increase in the global average surface temperature will likely exceed 1.6°C by 2050.
Responding to the report, Lauren Pagel, policy director at Earthworks, a Washington, D.C.-based environmental nonprofit, said in a statement that "the IEA says what Earthworks has long known: Preventing climate catastrophe requires the world to stop fossil fuel expansion and to do everything we can right now to cut methane gas pollution."
"In order to right historical injustices for those who have disproportionately experienced the harms of extraction—Indigenous and Black and Latino and poorer white communities in the U.S., specifically—we must aggressively and immediately cut pollution and manage the decline of the fossil fuel industry," she continued.
"This report discredits any attempt to use methane reduction efforts as an excuse to further permit fossil fuel expansion," Pagel added. "It also gives President Biden sufficient justification to declare a climate emergency and steer the U.S. toward a sustainable, just energy future."
Declaring a climate emergency unlocks certain executive powers that the Biden administration could use the battle the crisis without congressional action.
While Biden said in August that he has "practically" declared a climate emergency, campaigners note that his administration has approved more new permits for fossil fuel drilling on public lands during his first two years in office than former President Donald Trump did in 2017 and 2018.
The Biden administration has also held a massive fossil fuel lease sale in the Gulf of Mexico, approved the highly controversial Willow project and Mountain Valley Pipeline, and increased liquefied natural gas production and export.
Hundreds of thousands of Americans have also urged the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to strengthen and expand a draft rule on methane reduction. The Inflation Reduction Act signed into law by Biden last year provides hundreds of millions of dollars for reducing methane emissions.
On Wednesday, climate activists confronted U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg over his department's approval of the Sea Port and GulfLink oil terminals along the Texas Gulf Coast.
According to the new IEA report, the good news is that "more than 75% of methane emissions from oil and gas operations and half of emissions from coal today can be abated with existing technology, often at low cost. The oil and gas sector has the greatest share of ready-to-implement and cost-effective technical opportunities to reduce methane emissions."
However, as the IEA's Global Methane Tracker shows, the energy industry worldwide spewed 135 million tons of the potent greenhouse gas into the atmosphere last year, just short of a record set in 2019.
"Reducing methane emissions from the energy sector is one of the best—and most affordable—opportunities to limit global warming in the near term," IEA executive director Fatih Birol said in a statement. "Early actions by governments and industry to drive down methane emissions need to go hand-in-hand with reductions in fossil fuel demand and CO2 emissions."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular