许可:阻碍美国低碳投资的恶魔

美国低碳项目面临着一系列不同的风险——从缓慢的联邦许可时间表到庞大的支出预算——以及不确定的盈利之路。

能源公司看到了越来越多的投资美国低碳项目的机会,特别是去年夏天根据《通货膨胀削减法案》通过的加强税收激励措施

但对项目许可的普遍担忧、政治制度的潜在变化以及新项目启动所需的巨额资金给该国新兴的低碳市场带来了巨大风险。

尽管存在各种不同的风险,但专家们在 8 月 31 日的 Hart Energy 碳与 ESG 战略会议上讨论了许可问题,认为这是目前扩大低碳能源转型的最大障碍。

例如,碳捕集与封存(CCS)项目在通过监管流程时就陷入了繁文缛节。美国大多数州的项目需要获得环境保护局 (EPA) 的许可才能钻 VI 级注入井,这些注入井用于将二氧化碳注入地下水库进行永久封存。

EPA 目前正在处理大量积压的 VI 类注入井许可证申请。

Tailwater Capital负责任投资主管兼 Tailwater Innovation Partners 首席执行官罗杰·福克斯 (Roger Fox) 表示,“CS 项目只是担心你是否有能力允许该项目——无论是油井,还是设施”。

美国石油学会气候和 ESG 政策主任 Jennifer Stewart表示,清洁能源基础设施项目正面临着与石油和天然气生产商多年来面临的类似许可障碍。

“最大的风险]肯定是许可:许可碳捕集投资、许可基础设施,包括碳管道基础设施和碳氢化合物基础设施,”斯图尔特说。

到目前为止,只有两个州能够在允许 VI 级井封存二氧化碳方面做出自己的决定。EPA 已批准北达科他州和怀俄明州的 VI 级油井许可具有首要或主要执行责任。

今年早些时候,美国环保署还签署了一项拟议规则,批准路易斯安那州提出的 VI 级优先请求。

但在北达科他州和怀俄明州之外,许可证审批的时间正在不断延长。

“获得许可的一方可能需要一段时间,而且你可能需要通过很多不同的机构才能获得这些许可,”亨顿·安德鲁斯·库斯律师事务所的律师贾森·希尔 (Jason Hill) 说。

“到目前为止,获得联邦许可的最大障碍是环境审查,而这是由《国家环境政策法》的法规推动的,”他说。

根据 EPA 数据,全国约有 120 个 VI 类注入井正在等待许可申请。


相关: 许可证、政策、利润:大型二氧化碳项目的难题


成本、日历复杂性

福克斯表示,随着美国低碳行业解决其早期问题,一些公司发现老式项目执行风险再次出现。

与钻探水平油井(在全国各地盆地复制的相当简化的制造过程)不同,这里确实不是大规模开发成功低碳项目的手册。

CCS 领域雄心勃勃的项目,例如直接空气捕获 (DAC),都依赖于新兴的早期技术。

而且这些技术并不便宜根据西方石油公司向投资者提供的最新消息,该公司正斥资约 11 亿美元在二叠纪盆地建设其第一个商业规模的 DAC 项目。

西方石油公司又斥资11 亿美元收购 Carbon Engineering,这家加拿大初创公司为二叠纪 DAC 项目开发专有的除碳技术。

“我们今天谈到的 CCS 项目——嘿——钱很多。” 这些都不是小赌注,”福克斯说。“而且这些事情不一定能按时或按预算完成。”

福克斯表示,因此,当你面临巨额资本支出预算、旨在扩展基本上尚未在商业规模上得到验证的技术、并受到联邦许可不确定性的支持时,很难将这些预算整合为可投资的机会。 。

“那里可能有一些火车残骸,”福克斯说。

各公司在涉足 CCS 时保持开放的选择并寻求多种收入来源。埃克森美孚公司 (Exxon Mobil Corp.) 以 49 亿美元收购登伯里公司 ( Denbury Inc.),主要围绕登伯里庞大的二氧化碳管道网络及其陆上封存场地进行。


相关报道: 新兴 CCS 运营商 Lapis Energy 致力于减少“ancer Alley”二氧化碳排放


登伯里的核心业务是提高石油采收率 (EOR),即向成熟油藏注入二氧化碳以最大限度地提高采收率,埃克森美孚在办理 VI 级许可流程时可以封存二氧化碳。

这是因为埃克森美孚的一些二氧化碳承购协议即将到期,其中一些协议是在登伯里协议之前签署的。该公司签订的协议预计将于 2025 年开始,每年从林德位于德克萨斯州博蒙特的制氢工厂运输和永久储存多达 220 万吨二氧化碳。

原文链接/hartenergy

Permitting: The Boogeyman Hindering US Low-carbon Investment

U.S. low-carbon projects face a medley of different risks—from sluggish federal permitting timelines to huge spending budgets — and an uncertain road to profitability.

Energy companies are seeing growing opportunity to invest in U.S. low-carbon projects, especially with beefed-up tax incentives passed under the Inflation Reduction Act last summer.

But ubiquitous fears over project permitting, potential changes to political regimes and the huge capital lift required to get new projects off the ground pose huge risks to the nation’s emerging low-carbon marketplace.

Despite a myriad of different risks, permitting issues stand out as the biggest barrier to scaling the low-carbon energy transition at this point, experts discussed during Hart Energy’s Carbon & ESG Strategies conference on Aug. 31.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects, for example, are getting tangled up in red tape as they move through the regulatory process. Projects in most U.S. states require permits from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to drill Class VI injection wells, which are used to inject CO2 into underground reservoirs for permanent storage.

The EPA is currently working through a sizable backlog of permit applications for Class VI injection wells.

“CCS projects are just bereft with concerns about your ability to permit the project—whether it be the wells, whether it be the facility,” said Roger Fox, head of responsible investment at Tailwater Capital and CEO at Tailwater Innovation Partners.

Jennifer Stewart, director of climate and ESG policy at the American Petroleum Institute, said clean energy infrastructure projects are facing similar permitting hurdles that oil and gas producers have faced for years.

“[The biggest risk] is most certainly permitting: permitting for carbon capture investment, permitting for infrastructure, both carbon pipeline infrastructure and hydrocarbon infrastructure,” Stewart said.

So far, only two states are able to call their own shots when it comes to permitting Class VI wells for CO2 sequestration. The EPA has approved primacy, or primary enforcement responsibility, over Class VI well permitting in North Dakota and Wyoming.

The EPA also signed a proposed rule to approve Louisiana’s request for Class VI primacy earlier this year.

But outside of North Dakota and Wyoming, timelines for permit approvals are ballooning.

“That permitting side can take a while and you can have a lot of different agencies that you have to go through to get those,” said Jason Hill, counsel at Hunton Andrews Kurth.

“By far, the biggest holdup on getting federal permits is on the environmental reviews, and that’s driven by the statute called the National Environmental Policy Act,” he said.

There are about 120 pending permit applications for Class VI injection wells around the country, according to EPA data.


RELATED: Permits, Policy, Profit: The Hang-ups with Large-scale CO2 Projects


Cost, calendar complications

As the U.S. low-carbon sector works out its early kinks, some companies are seeing the resurgence of old-fashioned project execution risk, Fox said.

Unlike drilling a horizontal oil well—a fairly streamlined manufacturing process replicated in basins across the country—there really isn’t a playbook for developing a successful low-carbon project at scale.

Ambitious projects in the CCS space, such as direct air capture (DAC), are relying on emerging and early-stage technologies.

And these technologies aren’t cheap—Occidental Petroleum is spending roughly $1.1 billion to build its first commercial-scale DAC project in the Permian Basin, according to the company’s most recent update to investors.

Occidental is spending another $1.1 billion to acquire Carbon Engineering, the Canadian startup developing the proprietary carbon-removal technology for the Permian DAC project.

“The CCS projects we talked about today—they’re a lot of money. These aren’t small bets,” Fox said. “And these things are not necessarily coming in on time or budget.”

So when you’re faced with enormous capital spending budgets, aimed at scaling technologies that largely haven’t been proven at commercial scale, underpinned by federal permitting uncertainty—it’s difficult to knit those together into an investible opportunity, Fox said.

“There can be some train wrecks out there,” Fox said.

Companies are keeping their options open and seeking multiple revenue streams as they dive into CCS. Exxon Mobil Corp.’s $4.9 billion acquisition of Denbury Inc. is centered around Denbury’s massive CO2 pipeline network and its onshore sequestration sites.


RELATED: Upstart CCS Operator Lapis Energy Takes on ‘Cancer Alley’ CO2 Emissions


But Denbury’s core business of enhanced oil recovery (EOR)—where CO2 is injected into maturing oil reservoirs to maximize recovery—gives Exxon places to sequester CO2 while working through the Class VI permitting process.

That’s because the clock is ticking for some of Exxon’s CO2 offtake agreements, some of which were inked prior to the Denbury deal. The company’s agreement to transport and permanently store up to 2.2 million metric tons annually of CO2 from Linde’s hydrogen production facility in Beaumont, Texas, is slated to begin in 2025.