The Obama administration denied that its proposal to reduce venting and flaring of natural gas is a duplicative regulation on Wednesday, while Republican lawmakers complained about its potential to kill oil and gas production.
In a meeting of the House Natural Resources Committee’s energy and mineral resources subcommittee, Amanda Leiter, deputy assistance secretary for land and minerals management in the Department of the Interior, said the rule would simply be aimed at reducing wasteful burning of natural gas.
Republicans and industry opponents say the rule is simply another way for the Obama administration to attack greenhouse gas emissions. Venting and flaring of natural gas releases methane into the atmosphere, a short-lived greenhouse gas that is 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide.
Leiter said that’s not the case. Instead, it’s about wasting money.
“These resources belong to the American public and they should be used, not wasted,” she said.
The Bureau of Land Management released a proposed rule in February that would require reductions in the amount of natural gas that could be burned off during venting and flaring. Opponents say the rule could significantly reduce the amount of natural gas being produced on federal and state lands.
The bureau estimates about 375 billion cubic feet of natural gas was lost to venting and flaring between 2009 and 2014, which would have been enough to supply 5.1 million homes for a year. The agency estimates venting and flaring costs taxpayers about $23 million in royalties each year.
Mark Watson, oil and gas supervisor at the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, said he is among those who is worried that the regulation would duplicate Environmental Protection Agency rules that are already in place.
“There are parts of BLM’s proposed rule that clearly derive from BLM’s statutory authority,” he said. “However, there is a portion of the BLM’s proposed rule designed to regulate air pollution, which is clearly a matter that has been delegated to the states and the EPA by Congress.”
Rep. Doug Lamborn, D-Colo., said the rule is another example of the administration choosing policies designed to keep energy resources in the ground rather than allowing companies to operate profitably.
“We are here today conducting oversight on yet another regulatory overreach by an administration that seems more dedicated to keeping it in the ground than freeing us from the shackles of [the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries],” he said.
However, Democrats coming to the Bureau of Land Manangement’s defense said it is strange that Republicans would be comfortable with allowing energy companies to waste their product.
Rep. Alan Lowenthal, D-N.Y., said the rule would stop the waste of a natural resource, the royalties from which often subsidize state governments to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. He said he would think Republicans would be in favor of a regulation that would stop that waste and instead generate more money for the taxpayers.
“The arguments against this rule are scare tactics, plain and simple,” he said. “What’s really scary is the amount of natural gas that’s being wasted in this country.”
Republicans on the subcommittee said the real way to reduce the amount of methane being released into the atmosphere is not by restricting venting and flaring, but instead making it easier for natural gas pipelines to be built.
Rep. Cresent Hardy, R-Nev., said the rule would create high compliance costs that would shut down more wells during a time when energy prices have plummeted. The Bureau of Land Management is being hypocritical with its policies by increasing the costs on businesses while making it harder for them to get their product to market due to slow pipeline approval process, he said.
“The most efficient way to transport natural gas is by pipeline. Most pipeline infrastructure is delayed or canceled because companies can’t get right of way through the federal government,” he said.
