Daily on Energy: A surprising thing about the Cheney for Stefanik swap

But something about the change in the Republican power structure struck us as noteworthy.

Stefanik, despite her pro-Trump rhetoric, is actually among one of the most liberal Republicans, while Cheney has a very conservative voting record.

Their views on climate change might be among the biggest contrasts.

An early climate champion: Stefanik, a 36-year-old from upstate New York, was the lead co-sponsor of a resolution in 2017 recognizing climate change as a problem that can be addressed by promoting innovation of clean energy technologies.

That is now the mainstream position of Republicans in Congress, and is being actively encouraged by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. But at the time, the party mostly dismissed climate change as a threat.

Former GOP Rep. Carlos Curbelo of Florida, a leader on climate change who introduced carbon tax legislation, noted that Stefanik co-sponsored the first Republican climate resolution in 2015, led by retired Rep. Chris Gibson of New York, during her first year in Congress.

Stefanik insisted on leading the next version of the resolution, Curbelo told Josh.

“It’s clear that on climate and the environment, Rep. Stefanik has a more centrist record, and since she arrived in Congress, has been one of the leading voices encouraging Republicans to engage the issue and support emissions reductions,” Curbelo said.

What about Cheney? The vocal Trump critic is from Wyoming, a major fossil fuel state, and was not on board with McCarthy and House Republican leaders’ shift on climate change.

When McCarthy and his lieutenants first unveiled climate legislative proposals in early 2020, before the pandemic, Cheney wasn’t in the room. She has since co-sponsored legislation supporting loans to build pipelines that can transport captured carbon from coal plants, but her promotion of the bill, introduced in March, does not mention climate change.

She also was not a part of the program for the House Republican climate “innovation” forum last month.

Why should you care? The Republican position on climate seems pretty baked-in, and it’s not like Cheney was out there undermining McCarthy’s message. But Curbelo argued Stefanik’s elevation could “accelerate” the GOP moving “in the right direction on this issue.”

Welcome to Daily on Energy, written by Washington Examiner Energy and Environment Writers Josh Siegel (@SiegelScribe) and Abby Smith (@AbbySmithDC). Email [email protected] or [email protected] for tips, suggestions, calendar items, and anything else. If a friend sent this to you and you’d like to sign up, click here. If signing up doesn’t work, shoot us an email, and we’ll add you to our list.

‘DRAMATIC’ ECONOMIC CHANGES NEEDED TO MEET BIDEN NDC: President Joe Biden’s pledge to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030 would require fundamentally transforming the country’s fossil fuel-based economy, Josh writes for a new story in our magazine.

A lot of work has been done, with the United States leading the world in emissions reductions since 2005 because of natural gas and renewables replacing more expensive and dirtier coal in electricity.

But to meet Biden’s target, the pace of emissions cuts will need to increase substantially and reach into sectors in which emissions have increased or remained steady, such as transportation, heavy manufacturing, and buildings.

“It’s going to be really hard,” said Sasha Mackler, director of the Energy Project at the Bipartisan Policy Center. “It will require changes across all sectors of our economy that will be pretty dramatic. They will unlock a lot of economic opportunity, but it will also have some dislocations and require a new collaboration between the public and private sector on environmental issues that we haven’t seen before.”

Cleaner electricity is unseen. Other changes won’t be: Most people are unaware of what fuel source generates power when they flick on the light switch. However, making cuts in other parts of the economy could be more noticeable to people

“You want to electrify buildings, but a lot of people like their gas furnace,” said Alex Trembath, deputy director of the Breakthrough Institute. “To the extent this is seen as a climate policy instead of an appliance upgrade, it will be challenging.”

Change could be greatest in transportation. Making substantial progress in electrifying transport means consumption of oil-based gasoline and diesel would have to drop substantially this decade. That has ripple effects on the economy. “What does the world look like when the U.S. is consuming 30-plus percent less gas and diesel? That’s millions of barrels. The economic ramifications are potentially quite large,” said Joseph Majkut, director of climate policy at the Niskanen Center.

Supporters of the Biden administration’s plans say his proposed policies to boost EV sales contain carrots and not sticks and are intended to reduce the costs of electric vehicles rather than raise the costs of polluting technologies. There is no mandate people drive EVs.

“It’s politically smart not to create fear on the part of the public that their SUVs will be taken away,” said Mary Nichols, the former chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board who was considered to be Biden’s EPA administrator. “The goal is to promote a superior product. People will appreciate the advantages of going electric, and the things seen as real or perceived obstacles will disappear.”

Keep reading here.

GRANHOLM EAGER FOR NUCLEAR SUBSIDIES: The Biden administration is “eager” to work with Congress on subsidizing economically struggling nuclear plants to keep them from retiring, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said yesterday.

“The DOE has not historically subsidized plants, but this is a moment to consider to make sure we keep the current fleet active,” Granholm said in testimony about her agency’s budget request before an energy subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee.

Why it matters: Granholm’s statement represents the first time an administration official has publicly acknowledged interest in subsidizing nuclear power plants that have been closing in recent years due to competition from natural gas and renewables.

“We are not going to be able to achieve our climate goals if nuclear power plants shut down. We have to find ways to keep them operating,” Granholm said, noting that nuclear provides more than half of the U.S.’ zero-carbon power.

Granholm did not propose a specific type of subsidy, only floating that help for nuclear could be included as part of Biden’s infrastructure and climate spending proposal.

The White House is interested in working with Congress to provide production tax credits to nuclear plants, sources following the conversations have told Josh.

WHAT DOES BIDEN MEAN BY CONSERVATION? Republicans don’t know what to make of the Biden administration’s new report on how it plans to conserve 30% of public lands and waters by 2030 because it lacks detail.

The “America the Beautiful” report goes out of its way to contest GOP concerns that the conservation effort — a priority for Interior Secretary Deb Haaland when she was in Congress — would constitute a federal land grab.

It calls for financially incentivizing “locally led and voluntary” conservation and restoration efforts by farmers, ranchers, fishers, and forest owners, but it doesn’t identify specific places for stronger protection or detail what level of conservation would be required for an area to count towards the 30% goal.

The report broadly identifies priority areas for investments, including creating more parks, expanding conservation of fish and wildlife habitats and corridors, increasing access for outdoor recreation, and standing up a Civilian Climate Corps to employ young people to restore public spaces.

“Although I am pleased to see the administration is finally publicizing information on a previously undefined goal, the lack of specific details in the report is unacceptable,” said Rep. Bruce Westerman, top Republican of the House Natural Resources Committee. “It’s vital that the administration gets past high-level talking points and defines their policies.”

DEATH KNELL FOR ARIZONA’S 100% CLEAN ENERGY RULES?: The Arizona Corporation Commission rejected a proposal this week that would have required the state’s utilities to achieve carbon-free power by 2050, despite initial approval of the plan back in November and strong support from the state’s major utilities for the requirements.

The rejection of the rules came after the state’s utility regulators considered several amendments by the three Republican commissioners that weakened the requirements. The three GOP commissioners voted to approve an amendment that would have changed the clean power requirements from a mandate to simply a “goal,” after which the commission’s two Democrats voted with Republican Justin Olson to sink the rules, according to a report from Canary Media.

The setback comes after years of work by the commission to craft the clean energy requirements. Democrats and environmental groups had spent big last year to attempt to flip control of the Arizona Corporation Commission to Democratic to help secure the clean energy rules and push the utility regulators to be more aggressive on climate change, but Republicans managed to hang onto the majority.

Arizona’s Republican Gov. Doug Ducey had opposed the commission’s clean energy rules, despite backing from the state’s major utilities. The state’s largest power company, Arizona Public Service, set a goal last year to achieve carbon-free power by 2050 and to have 45% of its generation coming from renewable power by 2030.

NEW MEXICO TIGHTENS PLANS TO CURB OIL AND GAS POLLUTION: The New Mexico Environment Department eliminated all exemptions for smaller oil and gas wells in a new proposal to curb the industry’s emissions of smog-forming pollutants and methane.

The state agency has previously floated exemptions for those lower-producing facilities, classifying them as having a “low potential to emit,” but the requirements in its new proposal will apply to all kinds of wells. Under the rules, oil and gas operators must check monthly for leaks and fix them within 15 days.

The New Mexico Environment Department estimates its proposal will reduce smog-forming pollutants by nearly 260 million pounds each year and curb methane emissions by more than 851 million pounds each year. That amount of methane is “equivalent to the energy needed to power 1.2 million New Mexico homes for an entire year,” said James Kenney, New Mexico’s environment secretary.

Kenney described the proposal as “nationally leading,” and it’s a significant step for New Mexico, one of the top oil and gas producing states in the country. The environment agency’s plans follow a rule from the New Mexico Oil Conservation Commission earlier this year banning routine venting and flaring of methane at the state’s oil and gas operations.

The New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board will weigh the proposed rules during public hearing this fall, and if finalized, they will go into effect early next year.

HYDROPOWER’S PITCH TO BIDEN: A coalition of hydropower industry groups, companies, and environmental organizations is calling on the Biden administration to spend $63 billion over 10 years to help preserve existing hydropower resources.

The plan, if implemented, would preserve more than 80 gigawatts of existing hydropower and 23 GW of pumped storage capacity, according to the groups. It would also restore more than 20,000 miles of rivers and help rehabilitate or remove old and hazardous dams. The plan notes that out of the country’s more than 90,000 dams, only 2,500 currently generate power.

Under the plan, the biggest chunk of funding ($24 billion) would go to federal agencies such as the Army Corps of Engineers that own and oversee regulation for dams. Another significant piece of the overall funding (nearly $20 billion) would go to improving oversight of dam safety.

Other pieces of the plan include tax incentives for dam safety and removals, as well as a dedicated $15 billion fund over 10 years to remove 2,000 dams that are at the end of their useful life. Overall, the groups estimate that implementing the plan would reduce 5.1 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

OIL AND GAS LOBBY LOOKS FOR HELP WITH MEXICO: The American Petroleum Institute wants the Biden administration to confront Mexico for “discriminating” against U.S. energy companies by restricting investments.

These actions flout the intent of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade deal the Trump administration negotiated, API CEO Mike Sommers said in a letter yesterday to Granholm, Trade Representative Katherine Tai, Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, and Secretary of State Antony Blinken.

President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has led changes to the country’s laws changing market rules favoring state-owned companies such as PEMEX.

“We encourage you to continue engaging diplomatically with President Lopez Obrador and your cabinet-level counterparts in Mexico’s agencies to urge the Government of Mexico to uphold its USMCA commitments to treat U.S. investors and U.S. exporters fairly,” Sommers said.

CLEAN ENERGY LOBBYING FIRM BECOMES BIPARTISAN: Boundary Stone Partners, a lobbying firm with clean energy clients founded by Obama administration alums, has acquired GOP energy and environmental government affairs firm S2C Pacific.

Boundary Stone Partners co-founders Jeff Navin and Brandon Hurlbut, both former Energy Department chiefs of staff, said their expansion demonstrates bipartisan interest in addressing climate change, and gives the firm more heft with clients.

They brought on S2C Pacifics’ principals to the expanded company, including Shane Skelton, who was an energy adviser to former House Speaker Paul Ryan, and Patrick Currier, who was counsel to House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans.

It also acquired Catapult Policy Strategies, a Democratic transportation government affairs firm co-founded by Pete Gould, who worked in the Obama administration’s Transportation Department.

Gould is joining Boundary Stone Partners as senior vice president with Skelton and Currier.

The Rundown

Wall Street Journal As Texas went dark, the state paid natural gas companies to go offline

Bloomberg Energy Transfer made $2.4 billion from Texas winter storm

New York Times Biden promises to ‘build back better.’ Some climate experts see trouble.

Washington Post After another leak, EPA probes whether St. Croix refinery poses ‘an imminent risk to people’s health’

Bloomberg Citi and Trafigura are pitching ‘coal to zero’ mining vehicle

Chicago Tribune Canadian electric vehicle maker to build buses and trucks at new Joliet factory

Calendar

TUESDAY | MAY 11

10 a.m. 216 Hart. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure will hold a hearing titled, “Equity in Transportation Infrastructure: Connecting Communities, Removing Barriers, and Repairing Networks across America.”

WEDNESDAY | MAY 12

10 a.m. 301 Russell. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will hold a hearing to consider the nominations of Shannon Estenoz to be the Interior Secretary’s assistant secretary of Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Radhika Fox to be the EPA’s assistant administrator for water, and Michal Freedhoff to be the EPA’s assistant administrator for chemical safety.

THURSDAY | MAY 13

10 a.m. 366 Dirksen. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will hold a hearing to examine offshore energy development in federal waters. It will also consider the nomination of Tommy Beaudreau to be deputy secretary of the Interior.

10:30 a.m. The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Environment and Climate Change Subcommittee will hold a remote hearing on Superfund provisions in the “CLEAN Future Act.”