Cold Lake First Nations’ concerns about carbon storage hub are still not addressed by Jeremy Appel, September 24, 2024
(ANNews) – The chief of Cold Lake First Nations says that none of his concerns with the Pathways Alliance’s proposed carbon storage hub on his people’s traditional territories have been addressed.
“It just seems like everything is getting rubber stamped,” Chief Kelsey Jacko told Alberta Native News from the sidelines of the Carbon Capture Canada conference in Edmonton on Sept. 11.
The Pathways Alliance is composed of Canadian Natural Resources, Cenovus Energy, ConocoPhillips Canada, Imperial, MEG Energy and Suncor Energy, which together represent 95 per cent of tar sands production.
Their signature project is a 400-km network of pipelines transferring carbon dioxide from oil sands production facilities in northern Alberta to a subterranean storage hub near Cold Lake, Alta. The consortium began filing paperwork for regulatory approval from the Alberta Energy Regulator in March.
Last year, Chief Jacko criticized the alliance’s consultation process when he spoke on stage at the conference.
“They’re ramming it down our throats,” he said.
Jacko wasn’t invited to speak again at this year’s conference, but attended as a delegate, in part to get answers from Pathways, which had a booth set up in the northeast corner of the Edmonton Convention Centre’s exhibition hall.
Foremost among his concerns is the megaproject’s lack of an emergency management plan, which he said he was told would only be developed after the project was completed.
“Everybody thinks about the economic side of things, but our environment is suffering,” he added.
Jacko is especially worried about the impact of injecting carbon underground on his people’s water supply.
“It’s very dear to me, because we still have a beautiful lake and I want my lake to be beautiful for the ones yet to come, for the next seven generations,” he said.
Getting straight answers has been difficult, Jacko said, in part because every time representatives from Pathways approach him, he has to make his case to a different person.
“It’s hard when you’re [always] dealing with new people,” he said.
According to Chief Jacko, Pathways has made 146 separate applications for regulatory approval.
“A lot of nations don’t have the capacity that our nation does, and it feels like they’re being left behind,” he said.
The alliance has grouped all Treaty First Nations and Métis communities in the project’s vicinity together, as if their concerns are identical, which Jacko characterized as a “slap in the face when you’re talking about historic treaties.”
The federal government is part of the problem, he added, noting that they’ve thus far refused to order an environmental impact assessment, since the proposed hub is on private, not Crown, land.
“But when you talk about traditional territory, it affects us all,” said Jacko.
In May, online news outlet The Narwhal revealed that alliance president Kendall Dilling wrote a letter to the federal government in 2023 requesting that the project not be subject to an impact assessment.
Environment and Climate Change Minister Stephen Guilbeault told the outlet that it would be premature for the federal government to order an assessment because the project’s application wasn’t completed.
Across the exhibition hall from the Pathways booth was Enbridge, which hosted an information session on the Wabamun Carbon Hub in northwest Edmonton, slated for opening in 2027.
The Wabamun project has support from five Indigenous communities in its vicinity -Alexander First Nation, Paul First Nation, Enoch Cree Nation, Alexis Nakota Sioux Nation and the Lac Ste. Anne Métis Community Association.
Through the First Nation Capital Investment Partnership, these communities will have an opportunity to co-own the hub.
Nicole Baker, Enbridge’s senior advisor of Indigenous community engagement, said that prior to the project’s development, the company reached out to the nearby Indigenous communities to ask if they wanted to be involved in it.
In 2022, Enbridge officials participated in a pipe ceremony with community leaders at Enoch, which Baker emphasized was symbolically important.
“Similar to how when treaties were formed in this country, it was done in a pipe ceremony. Yes, there was a signed contract, but for the Indigenous people, our ways of entering those contracts and committing to each other is through the pipe ceremony,” said Baker, who is from Red Pheasant Cree Nation.
During the question-and-answer session, Baker added that Enbridge essentially came to the Indigenous leaders “with a blank sheet.”
“It wasn’t like, ‘Here’s our hub, here’s our plan, here’s what we’re laying out for you. Take it or leave it.’ It was very much like, ‘Is this something you’re interested in? Do you have any concerns? Let’s work through that,’” she said.
She emphasized that “not every single person in the community is jumping up to praise CCUS,” suggesting that the way Pathways has proceeded with its project has raised concerns among members of the Wabamun communities.
“There’s still a lot of conversations that need to be had, from the leadership level, down to everyone, and there’s still a lot of questions,” said Baker.
Chief Jacko of Cold Lake First Nations said that he’s not opposed to hosting a carbon storage hub on his people’s traditional lands, but wants to see a “hard reset,” in which Indigenous communities are consulted from the outset of planning.
If that doesn’t occur, he said he’s prepared to take the Pathways Alliance to court, which he recognizes will be a costly and time-consuming process.
Alarm bells raised as Alberta’s refusal to assess dangers of massive oilsands carbon capture project sparks safety concerns Press Release by Alberta Wilderness Association, October 31, 2024
CALGARY/TERRITORIES OF THE BLACKFOOT AND PEOPLES OF TREATIES 6 AND 7, HOME TO MÉTIS NATION OF ALBERTA, REGION III — A local First Nation and environmental groups are sounding the alarm after the Alberta government and Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) denied their request to order an environmental impact assessment (EIA) for a massive carbon capture project in Alberta’s oilsands.
The request for an EIA was made by Ecojustice on behalf of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) and several environmental and community organizations in May 2024, to ensure the $16.5-billion Pathways Alliance project will not have significant adverse impacts on the environment, local communities, and the rights of Indigenous peoples. This week, the AER responded that it would not be ordering the assessment.
The Pathways Alliance — a consortium of Canada’s six largest oilsands producers accounting for 95% of the country’s oilsands production — plans to develop a carbon capture and storage (CCS) project that would capture carbon dioxide from at least 13 oilsands facilities in northeastern Alberta and transport the carbon via over 600-km of pipeline to an area south of Cold Lake, AB, where it would be injected underground for storage. This is the largest CCS project ever proposed in Canada, and one of the largest globally.
They are fucking insane, as usual. Entire families and or communities could be wiped out – in minutes.
Over recent months, the Pathways Alliance has been applying to the AER for various authorizations that are necessary to build the project. Pathways has split the megaproject into at least 66 smaller segments and has made multiple applications for each — at least 126 by the time they are all submitted.That’s what criminal corporate entities do in Alberta, and AER/UCP let them get away with it. It’s how Encana/Ovintiv avoided cumulative impacts assessments for its massive and significantly harmful shallow frac experiments and hundreds of toxic, air polluting, noise law violating compressor stations. It’s standard “best” voluntary practice by Canada’s hideous life destroying oil, gas and bitumen industry.
An EIA is an opportunity to look at a project as a whole and ensure all environmental, economic, health, and social impacts of the project are adequately identified and addressed. This is why it is a standard step across Canada when assessing projects of this size. By failing to conduct an EIA, the AER is allowing a piecemeal approach, known as “project splitting,” which impairs the AER’s ability to adequately identify and assess all project-specific, direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts.Intentional. Industry and AER know damn well CCS is high risk, life threatening, ground water polluting, and does not work as claimed by the lying profit raping players.
The lack of an EIA also undermines Indigenous and other frontline communities’ ability to understand the impacts of this project on their rights. Assessing impacts on Aboriginal and Treaty rights is required as part of Alberta’s duty to consult, but ACFN has been seeking critical information about this project from both Alberta and the Pathways Alliance for over two years — to no avail.
Concerns about the environmental and health impacts of CCS projects are well documented around the world. These projects can exacerbate air pollution, put stress on watersheds, risk groundwater contamination, and cause dangerous leaks and explosions. Since 2010, there have been 76 incidents involving carbon dioxide pipelines in the US. For example, a carbon dioxide pipeline exploded in Satartia, Mississippi in 2020 and a carbon dioxide pipeline leaked in Louisiana in April 2024. In October 2024, citing a carbon dioxide leak at a CCS project in Illinois, more than 150 environmental and advocacy groups asked the US Environmental Protection Agency to halt carbon dioxide injections and stop permitting new wells until regulations are revised. Following an environmental assessment, in May 2024, the government of Queensland, Australia rejected a proposed CCS project in the Great Artesian Basin due to concerns that carbon dioxide injected underground would cause groundwater contamination. The Government of Queensland has now banned carbon storage in Australia’s largest groundwater basin.
Questions have also been raised about who is paying for this multi-billion dollar project. Despite record production and profits in the oilsands in recent years, the Pathways Alliance does not want to pay for the CCS project itself.
Instead, the oilsands consortium expects Canadian taxpayers to pay — calling upon provincial and federal governments to provide financial support.
The federal government has developed investment tax credits to incentivize CCS projects, which would cover half of the capital costs, while Alberta would cover an additional 12%. Pathways is also currently negotiating “contracts for difference” with the federal government, which would guarantee the Pathways Alliance ongoing profits at an established carbon price. This all could mean that the public bears most of the costs, and private companies get all of the potential benefits.
With Alberta unwilling to assess the risks this project poses to the environment and local communities, it is an open question whether the federal government will step in to assess the risks of this megaproject.
Representatives from the groups said the following:
Chief Allan Adam, Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation:
“There’s a reason the AER doesn’t want to put the Pathways project through an environmental assessment. It is because it will expose the environmental impacts, the poor economic viability and the risks to human health. We know the AER works with industry to cover up their messes, this is just another example, a big example. With our Treaty rights on the line you can guarantee that ACFN will fight this tooth and nail.”
Matt Hulse, lawyer at Ecojustice:
“Just as the Competition Act was being strengthened this past year to introduce stronger anti-greenwashing provisions, the Pathways Alliance’s website was scrubbed. An environmental assessment is an excellent way to test whether the Pathways claims are actually true – not just about its ability to reduce emissions and help address climate change, but to do so safely and cost-effectively, particularly given all the taxpayer money they want to spend. With Alberta unwilling to assess this project, we hope that the federal government will step up.”
Phillip Meintzer, conservation specialist at Alberta Wilderness Association:
“The AER’s decision shows that Alberta’s environmental impact assessment process is fundamentally flawed. Project-splitting is a loophole that allows large industrial projects to steamroll ahead while ignoring cumulative impacts – putting Albertans, Indigenous communities, and ecosystems at risk of harm. It’s like saying that drivers don’t need a license to operate a vehicle because the individual parts aren’t technically a whole car. It’s absurd.”
Julia Levin, Associate Director, National Climate, Environmental Defence:
“Alberta’s decision to skip an environmental assessment of the Pathways Alliance’s massive carbon capture project is further evidence that the government has no desire to protect the health and safety of its residents. Carbon capture infrastructure is enormously risky, and Alberta lacks any robust safety oversight. Pipeline ruptures and carbon dioxide leaks can be devastating and put Alberta’s drinking water at risk. The communities that would bear all of the risks from the project deserve to have real answers about the dangers posed to their families.”
Emily Lowan, Fossil Fuel Supply Lead, Climate Action Network Canada:
“This decision is a slap in the face to all the communities who will have to bear the costs and consequences of this risky project. This year alone, we’ve seen regions like Queensland Australia and Illinois pump the brakes on carbon capture projects for health and safety reasons. Local residents don’t want to live in a hazardous waste disposal site, putting their drinkable water and air quality at risk. To subject renewable energy projects to suffocating restrictions, yet skip a comprehensive health and environmental assessment for a massive project from the fossil fuel industry, makes the Alberta government’s double standard abundantly clear.
Background
On May 13, 2024, Ecojustice submitted a request on behalf of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, Alberta Wilderness Association, Climate Action Network, Environmental Defence, and the No to CO2 Landowner’s Group to the Government of Alberta and the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) to conduct an environmental impact assessment of the Pathways Alliance’s carbon capture project.
CCS is massively expensive, with a terrible track record. Analysis from IEEFA concludes that most projects fail, and the few that are able to get off the ground underperform. A 2023 report out of Oxford University found that heavy dependence on CCS to reach net zero would cost at least $30 trillion USD more than a route based primarily on renewable energy, energy efficiency and electrification. Internal documents released by the US House of Representatives Oversight Committee reveal that oil and gas companies see CCS as a way to get social license to continue producing fossil fuels for decades to come.
Project Risks: A CCS project of this magnitude introduces a suite of potentially dangerous consequences. The capture, transportation, and storage of carbon dioxide have significant environmental impacts and raise a host of health and safety concerns, including:
- Leakage: carbon dioxide is an asphyxiant and, when leaked, can cause dangerous health effects including disorientation, confusion, rapid loss of consciousness, even death. Carbon dioxide is colourless and odourless, making it extremely difficult to detect and avoid leaks from pipelines or storage sites, putting nearby communities at risk.
- Emergency management: Alberta does not mandate an emergency response plan for carbon dioxide pipelines and does not mandate the release of information about how carbon dioxide is likely to disperse. These CO2 plumes can spread significant distances from the point of release.
- Groundwater contamination: an increase in carbon dioxide in underground aquifers can cause lead, arsenic, and other heavy metals that are contained in rocks to leach into water sources, putting drinking water quality at risk.
- Risk of explosion: when carbon dioxide is compressed for transport in a pipeline, it becomes highly volatile, creating risks of extremely dangerous pipeline explosions.
- Water consumption: the equipment used to capture carbon generates heat and must be cooled with water, which would be drawn from the Athabasca River system – putting more pressure on a watershed already under stress.
- Pollution: carbon capture equipment burns natural gas, increasing regional air and water pollution. The project also runs risks of underground leakage back into the atmosphere, groundwater contamination from stored carbon dioxide.
About
The Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation are K’ai Tailé Dené, the “people of the land of the willow.” This name signifies ACFN’s deep connection to their traditional territories, which are centred on the Peace-Athabasca Delta in what is now known as northeast Alberta. ACFN signed Treaty 8 in Fort Chipewyan in 1899 and continues to exercise their Treaty rights and maintain their cultural identity.
Alberta Wilderness Association is the oldest Alberta-based environmental conservation group with more than 7,500 members and supporters in Alberta and around the world. AWA seeks the completion of a protected areas network and good stewardship of Alberta’s public lands, waters, and biodiversity to ensure future generations enjoy the abundant benefits they provide.
Climate Action Network – Réseau action climat Canada (“CAN-Rac”) is a network of organizations taking action on climate and energy issues in the land currently called Canada.
Ecojustice uses the power of the law to defend nature, combat climate change and fight for a healthy environment. Its strategic, public interest lawsuits and advocacy lead to precedent-setting court decisions, law and policy that deliver lasting solutions to Canada’s most urgent environmental problems. As Canada’s largest environmental law charity, Ecojustice operates offices in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Ottawa and Halifax.
Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.
No to CO2 Landowners Group is a grassroots, nonpartisan organization of friends and neighbors in the County of St. Paul and Municipal District of Bonnyville, Alberta. It is concerned with protecting their land and preserving their quality of life.
For media inquiries
Jay Telegdi | Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation
(780) 881-7062, email hidden; JavaScript is required
Cari Siebrits, Communications Strategist | Ecojustice
(416) 368-7533 Ext. 504, email hidden; JavaScript is required
Phillip Meintzer, Conservation Specialist | Alberta Wilderness Association
(403) 283-2025, email hidden; JavaScript is required
Midhat Moini, Communication Manager| Environmental Defence
(437) 440-3400, email hidden; JavaScript is required
Vicky Coo, Communications Manager | Climate Action Network Canada
email hidden; JavaScript is required
***
Kareem Ali@EcoFriendlyKA:
I support a full investigation into the Decatur leak and agree that EPA permits should be halted until safety is guaranteedNow, that might get humanity somewhere, no more playing with fire when it comes to our climate.
Green Mathieu@MathBouffe:
Je soutiens sans réserve votre appel à suspendre les permis d’injection de CO2 après la fuite en Illinois. La sécurité environnementale doit être notre priorité.
Victoria Bogdan Tejeda@v_bogg:
A sad day: CA’s first CCS carbon injection/storage project is approved. The project is by one of the state’s largest oil companies. The company will benefit from massive tax subsidies.
Better Path Coalition@BetterPathPA:
… There’s no evidence that CO2 can be successfully sequestered at all. It’s all risk & no reward because there was never any real chance of one. No excuse to tolerate risk for reward, as our leaders so often do. (See fracking)
Better Path Coalition@BetterPathPA:
PA’s government is determined to make the same foolish mistake. No False Solutions PA is fighting to stop it. #CCSIsBS https://nofalsesolutionspa.org
Muncher@loveearthpet:
I’m with you on this. CCS is not the solution we need. Let’s focus on renewable energy and storage technologies instead.
The nation’s first commercial carbon sequestration plant is in Illinois. It leaks. The locals are worried: “Just because CO2 sequestration can be done doesn’t mean it should be done.” by Juanpablo Ramirez-Franco Regional Reporter, Illinois, Oct 21, 2024, Grist
A row of executives from grain-processing behemoth Archer Daniels Midland watched as Verlyn Rosenberger, 88, took the podium at a Decatur City Council meeting last week. It was the first meeting since she and the rest of her central Illinois community learned of a second leak at ADM’s carbon dioxide sequestration well beneath Lake Decatur, their primary source of drinking water.
“Just because CO2 sequestration can be done doesn’t mean it should be done,” the retired elementary school teacher told the city council. “Pipes eventually leak.”
ADM’s facility in central Illinois was the first permitted commercial carbon sequestration operation in the country, and it’s on the forefront of a booming, multibillion-dollar carbon capture and storage, or CCS, industry that promises to permanently sequester planet-warming carbon dioxide deep underground.
The emerging technology has become a cornerstone of government strategies to slash fossil fuel emissions and meet climate goals. Meanwhile, the Biden administration’s signature climate legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act, has supercharged industry subsidies and tax credits and set off a CCS gold rush.
There are now only four carbon sequestration wells operating in the United States — two each in Illinois and Indiana — but many more are on the way. Three proposed pipelines and 22 wells are up for review by state and federal regulators in Illinois, where the geography makes the landscape especially well suited for CCS. Nationwide, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is reviewing 150 different applications.
But if CCS operations leak, they can pose significant risks to water resources. And life itself, not just water. CO2 can kill, quickly, and damages the brain even in low concentrations. That’s because pressurized CO2 stored underground can escape or propel brine trapped in the saline reservoirs typically used for permanent storage. The leaks can lead to heavy metal contamination and potentially lower pH levels, all of which can make drinking water undrinkable. This is what bothers critics of carbon capture, who worry that it’s solving one problem by creating another.
In September, the public learned of a leak at ADM’s Decatur site after it was reported by E&E News, which covers energy and environmental issues. Additional testing mandated by the EPA turned up a second leak later that month. The EPA has confirmed these leaks posed no threat to water sources. Still, they raise concern about whether more leaks are likely, whether the public has any right to know when leaks occur, and if CCS technology is really a viable climate solution.
Officials with Chicago-based ADM spoke at the Decatur City Council meeting immediately after Rosenberger. They tried to assuage her concerns. “We simply wouldn’t do this if we didn’t believe that it was safe,” said Greg Webb, ADM’s vice president of state-government relations.
But ADM kept local and state officials in the dark for months about the first leak. They detected it back in March, five months after discovering corrosion in the tubing in the sequestration well. However, neither leak was disclosed as the company this spring petitioned the city of Decatur for an easement to expand its operations. The company also remained tight-lipped about the leak as it took part in major negotiations over the state’s first CCS regulations, the SAFE CCS Act, between April and May, according to several parties involved.
As a result, when Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker signed those CCS regulations into law at ADM’s Decatur facility in July, he was unaware of the leak that had occurred more than 5,000 feet below his seat, his office confirmed.
“I thought we were negotiating in good faith with ADM,” bill sponsor and state Senator Laura Fine, a Democrat, said in a statement. “When negotiating complex legislation, we expect all parties to be forthcoming and transparent in order to ensure we enact effective legislation.”
It’s unclear whether ADM was required by law to report the leaks any sooner than it did. According to the company’s permits, it only has to notify state and local officials if there are “major” or “serious” emergencies. The EPA wouldn’t comment on whether ADM was required to disclose, and neither the EPA nor ADM would confirm if the two leaks in Decatur qualified as “minor” emergencies.
In a statement, an ADM spokesperson said “the developments occurred at a depth of approximately 5,000 feet. They posed no threat to the surface or groundwater, nor to public health. It is for those reasons that additional notifications were not made.”
That’s little comfort to Jenny Cassel, a senior attorney with Earthjustice, a nonprofit environmental law firm.
“It’s a little terrifying,” Cassel said. “Because if the operator, in fact, made the wrong decision, and there is in fact a major problem, then not only will local officials not know about it, EPA is not going to know about it, which is indeed what appears to have happened here.”
The Illinois Clean Jobs Coalition, which applauded the signing of the regulatory bill earlier this summer, called ADM’s decision to keep the March 2024 leak from the public “unacceptable and dangerous.”
David Horn, a city councilman and professor of biology at Decatur’s Millikin University, said the city was blindsided. “This information was substantive, relevant information that could have influenced the terms of the easement that was ultimately signed in May of 2024,” he said, adding that the delay in disclosure calls into question the long-term safety of CCS and the ability of the EPA to protect water in the face of future CCS mishaps.
Illinois Legislature puts the brakes on a carbon capture boom
ADM waited until July 31 to notify the EPA of the leak, more than three months after it was discovered. The EPA alerted a small number of local and state officials and ordered the company to conduct further tests. They also issued a notice for alleged violations, citing the movement of CO2 and other fluids beyond “authorized zones” and the failure of the company to comply with its own monitoring, emergency response, and remediation plans.
But the infractions weren’t made public until September 13, when E&E News first reported the leak.
Two weeks later, ADM notified the EPA that it had discovered a second suspected leak. Only then did they temporarily pause CO2 injections into the well.
Councilman Horn says that isn’t good enough.
“The ADM company was aware of the leak in March, and we were not aware of it until September,” Horn said. “So really the city of Decatur, its residents, the decision-makers have been on the back foot for months.”
Meanwhile, the city of Decatur has contracted with an environmental attorney. They have yet to pursue any legal action.
Central Illinois is becoming a hotspot nationwide for the nascent CCS industry because of the Mt. Simon Sandstone, a deep saline formation of porous rock especially suitable for CO2 storage. It underlies the majority of Illinois and spills into parts of Indiana and Kentucky. It has an estimated storage capacity of up to 150 billion tons of CO2, making it the largest reservoir of its kind anywhere in the Midwest.
Texas sees ‘bonanza’ in carbon storage market Of course they do, Texas is as corrupt as Alberta
However, there is concern that pumping CO2 into saline reservoirs near subsurface water risks pushing pressurized CO2 and brine toward those resources, which would pose additional contamination risks. “Brine is pretty nasty stuff,” said Dominic Diguilio, a retired geoscientist from the EPA Office of Research and Development. “It has a very high concentration of salts, heavy metals, sometimes volatile organic compounds and radionuclides like radium.”
Horn says with so many more wells planned for Illinois, the Decatur leaks should be a wakeup call not just to the city, but to the region. He is particularly concerned about any future wells near east central Illinois’ primary drinking water source, the Mahomet aquifer, which lies above the Mt. Simon Sandstone formation.
Close to a million people rely on the Mahomet aquifer for drinking water, according to the Prairie Research Institute. In 2015, the EPA designated the underground reservoir a “sole source,” meaning there are no other feasible drinking water alternatives should the groundwater be contaminated. When it comes to the Mahomet aquifer, “there is no room for error if there is a mistake,” said Horn.
In light of the CCS boom headed their way, rural Illinois counties are stepping up to protect themselves from future carbon leaks, said Andrew Renh, the director of climate policy at Prairie Rivers Network, a Champaign-based environmental protection organization.
DeWitt County, half an hour north of Decatur, passed a carbon sequestration ban last year. To Decatur’s west, Sangamon County previously expanded an existing moratorium on transporting or storing CO2 underground. And just last week, Champaign County, directly east of Decatur, advanced an ordinance to consider a 12-month moratorium on CCS. Read Next
Rehn said his organization would like to see all 14 counties that overlap the Mahomet aquifer impose such bans.
In the meantime, his hope is that state legislators finish what the Illinois counties have started. Two companion bills introduced earlier this year would patch up the regulatory gaps left by the CCS bill Pritzker signed into law this summer. The bills would outright prohibit carbon sequestration immediately in and around the Mahomet Aquifer.
“My community, as well as many surrounding areas, depend on the Mahomet Aquifer to provide clean drinking water, support our agriculture, and sustain industrial operations,” bill sponsor and state Senator Paul Faraci, a Democrat, said in a statement. “Protecting the health and livelihood of our residents and industries that rely on the aquifer must remain our top priority.
As the Decatur City Council meeting adjourned last week, Rosenberger helped her husband, Paul Rosenberger, put on his coat. The row of ADM officials behind her walked past and then lingered in the council chamber. “I’m not afraid of them,” Rosenberger said as she wheeled her husband out.
“We haven’t changed anything yet,” Rosenberger said. “But I think maybe we can.”
EPA urged to suspend CO2 injection permits after Illinois leak, Critics of carbon storage projects are seeking tougher regulations that they say are needed to protect drinking water and the environment by Francis Chung, Oct 22, 2204, E&E News in Politicopro
More than 150 environmental and advocacy groups are asking EPA to halt carbon dioxide injections nationwide and stop permitting new wells until regulations are revised.
In a letter to EPA Administrator Michael Regan on Tuesday, the groups pressed the agency “to take immediate action to update rules and regulations for CO2 injection wells,” pointing to a leak detected earlier this year at a CO2 injection site in Decatur, Illinois.
Agribusiness company and well operator Archer-Daniels-Midland has said drinking water was not endangered by the leak, which was tied to corrosion in a monitoring well.
Although ADM paused injection last month after company tests pointed to a second suspected leak — this time of salty water — concern about the incident and EPA’s response hasn’t abated.
“The recent events at the ADM facility in Decatur are a warning sign that current regulatory practices are inadequate,” the green groups said in the letter, which was organized by Washington-based Food & Water Watch and the Illinois-based Eco-Justice Collaborative.
…
EPA Must Immediately Stop CO2 Injection Wells to Protect Public Safety and Drinking Water
The Honorable Michael Regan
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20460
October 22, 2024
Dear Administrator Regan,
We, the undersigned organizations dedicated to environmental justice, public health, scientific
integrity, and sustainable climate policy, are writing to ask you to suspend permits for injecting
carbon dioxide (CO2) underground, permitting of new CO2 injection wells, approval of primacy applications for CO2 injection wells, and to direct states with primacy over injection wells to halt injections and permitting of wells. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must exercise its broad authority to protect sources of drinking water from “imminent and substantial endangerment” under the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300i, which has been revealed by the multiple recent leaks of carbon dioxide from underground injection control wells.
These demands stem from 1) multiple leaks of CO2 and equipment failures at the Archer
Daniels Midland (ADM) facility in Decatur, Illinois; 2) new information about an increase in
non-compliance violations in Texas Class II wells starting in 2011; 3) a higher percentage of
Class II Texas CO2 injection wells that have failed one or more mechanical integrity tests when
these wells are compared to other Class II wells; and 4) findings at EPA that steel used for well
construction at the ADM site, and others around the country, is prone to corrosion in CO2
injection wells. Our demands also align with October 2024 recommendations from the White
House Environmental Justice Advisory Council. The disproportionate development of injection wells and other carbon capture infrastructure on environmental justice communities will increase the risk of harm to communities already overburdened by pollution and is inconsistent with the administration’s climate justice goals.
This June, EPA specifically communicated its concerns in an email to injection well applicants
with pending permits that steel and cement used in wells “are NOT suitable for construction of
these wells in most instances, particularly under potentially corrosive conditions when both
water and CO2 are present.” Yet, EPA continues to allow injections at wells with unsuitable
conditions. While ADM has, after two leaks, temporarily ceased injection, EPA should
proactively exercise its authority to protect the public from leaks before more occur, rather than rely on profit driven corporations to decide when they will stop putting the public at risk.
These leaks, as well as the new findings in Texas, highlight the broader risks posed to drinking
water, public health, and our climate by both Class VI and Class II injection wells used for CO2
storage and oil recovery respectively. These concerns are not only with the well construction
materials, but also with the EPA’s lack of transparency and oversight associated with these
leaks.
The events at the ADM facility have brought to light systemic problems with CCS technology
and its regulation, raising serious concerns that CCS is neither safe nor viable. Reported
failures at monitoring and detection systems due to corrosion and the migration of CO2 outside the intended storage zone expose multiple levels of failure. What is perhaps more concerning is that EPA has identified that injection wells around the country have the same design and material flaws that led to corrosion at at least one of ADM’s leaking wells, raising concerns that CO2 injection wells could very well be leaking significant quantities of CO2 into groundwater and the atmosphere.
To date, ADM has acknowledged the release of at least 1,394 metric tons of CO2 between 2018
and 2022. We also know that ADM’s Illinois CO2 injection operation had:
– experienced intermittent electrical shorts in September 2020 that were affecting the
gauges; and
– experienced surface leaks on November 28, 2021 and another on June 28, 2022. Both
were vented to the atmosphere; and
– detected characteristics of CO2 contamination in the Ironton-Galesville formation above
the confining zone sometime after 2021; and
– identified malfunctioning monitoring gauges by January 2022; and
– found a subsurface leak of 307 metric tons in 2022. According to ADM’s reporting to
EPA, the company took “temporary measures to isolate the CO2 leakage” which
consisted of removing the tube, plugging the well with cement, and closing a downhole
flow control valve and two wellhead valves at the surface to prevent further leakage. ADM’s response to the EPA’s Notice of Violation indicates that the company identified the corroded pipe in October 2023 and at that time stopped using the well.
Neither EPA nor ADM made efforts to inform the public of any of these failures. It wasn’t until
September 13, 2024, when investigative journalists reported 8,000 metric tons of CO2 had
leaked in March of 2024 that the public became aware that there were any problems at this
facility.
This timeline raises questions about the transparency and effectiveness of the monitoring and
enforcement process. Despite reporting that the presence of CO2 was detected outside the
confinement zone in 2021, that Monitoring Well #2 was totally malfunctioning in January of
2022, and that the first subsurface leak was detected as early as 2022, EPA waited until August
of 2024 to issue a notice of violation to ADM, and September to send an enforcement order. It is important to note that ADM was publicly silent on these leaks, both while they were negotiating state legislation that passed in May, and during negotiations with the City of Decatur regarding easements that would allow ADM to store CO2 under Lake Decatur.
Following release of the enforcement order, ADM reported another leak in another monitoring
well that it claims was discovered in response to EPA fact-finding requests, which prompted
ADM to stop injecting CO2 into its well. As with the 2018 leak, this additional breach highlights the uncertainty about how long that other well had been leaking, what caused these leaks, why the required testing regimes under ADM’s permit failed to detect the leak, why injection was not stopped earlier, and why we rely on corporations to monitor themselves for pollution instead of EPA regulators.
The threat to drinking water and public health posed by CO2 injection wells cannot be
overstated given that leaks from the injection of CO2 into underground saline formations can
migrate into overlying freshwater aquifers and be released into the atmosphere. Once CO2
dissolves in water, it forms carbonic acid, which lowers the pH of the water, eroding and
corroding rock and well equipment, and mobilizing toxic metals such as lead, arsenic, and
mercury. These metals are particularly concerning for drinking water sources near injection
sites. The release of CO2 into the atmosphere adversely impacts our climate. Even at relatively
low concentrations, it can impair cognitive, cardiovascular, neurologic, hearing, and vision
function through asphyxiation and toxicity as was, in part,demonstrated by a CO2 pipeline
rupture in Satartia, Mississippi that sent dozens of people to the hospital and highlighted the
challenges to first responders needing to respond to CO2 releases into the atmosphere.
Another serious concern associated with CO2 sequestration is induced seismicity from injecting CO2 underground, which can cause fractures and re-activate faults, either of which can result in additional pathways for CO2 migration. In combination with malfunctioning equipment, the injections can create unpredictable and widespread impacts from leaks on the water we drink and the air we breathe.
EPA’s oversight of carbon dioxide injection wells is lacking in general, and is highlighted by the
lack of transparency and oversight relating to these well failures. These concerns are not limited to Class VI wells like the one operated by ADM, but extend to Class II wells, a much larger universe of thousands of potential injection sites across the country used to extract oil. The practice of injecting CO2 into these wells carries many of the same risks associated with Class VI wells used for CCS; however, the regulations governing Class II wells are less stringent, posing an even greater risk of leaks.
EPA has approved primacy for permitting Class VI wells to Wyoming, North Dakota, Louisiana
and granted primacy for dozens of states for permitting Class II wells. Several states have
begun the process of gaining primacy or program revisions for class VI wells. Many of these
states, such as Louisiana, which was just granted primacy, have a history of favoring oil and gas interests over the health and wellbeing of their residents. A summary of peer review literature, regulatory actions, and other sources highlight this history in Louisiana specifically, raising serious questions about the appropriateness of EPA’s decision to grant primacy to states.
The concerns raised in this letter also bear on the efficacy of the 45Q tax credit for carbon oxide sequestration. 26 U.S.C. §45Q. Section 45Q(f)(2) expressly requires that the Secretary of
Treasury consult with EPA to define the term “secure geological storage,” which must be
achieved for a taxpayer to claim this credit. The statute requires the Secretary of Treasury to
determine “adequate security measures for secure geological storage . . . such that the qualified
carbon oxide does not escape into the atmosphere.” Rather than establish its own program to
ensure “secure geological storage,” Treasury relies on the EPA’s Underground Injection Control program contained in 40 C.F.R. Part 98 for both sequestration and enhanced oil and gas recovery facilities. 26 C.F.R. §1.45Q-3. The well failures at the ADM Decatur sequestration
facility put into question whether the EPA’s Underground Injection Control program’s well
construction standards are adequate to prevent “escape into the atmosphere” and ensure
permanent secure geological storage in the near term, much less on a geologic time scale.
Given the potential for significant harm to the environment, human health, taxpayers, and our
climate, we urge EPA to take immediate action to update rules and regulations for CO2 injection wells. These revisions are needed to ensure more rigorous permitting, transparency, and oversight to ensure safety of existing wells. Until these revisions are finalized, EPA should:
– Halt CO2 injections into Class II and Class VI wells across the country;
– Halt permitting of new Class II and Class VI injection wells;
– Halt approval of State primacy applications for Class II and Class VI injection programs;
and
– Direct States with primacy to halt injections as well as approvals of new Class II and
Class VI injection wells.
The risks associated with carbon capture and storage, particularly the injection of CO2 into
Class II and Class VI wells, are too great to ignore. The recent events at the ADM facility in
Decatur are a warning sign that current regulatory practices are inadequate. We urge EPA to act now to protect drinking water, public safety, and the environment from the dangers of CO2
injection, transportation, and storage.
Sincerely,
Original Signatories:
Food & Water Watch
350 Chicago (Illinois)
Blacks in Green (Illinois)
Central Illinois Healthy Community Alliance (Illinois)
Citizens Against Heartland Greenwashing Projects (Illinois)
Eco-Justice Collaborative (Illinois)
Citizens Against Predatory Pipelines (Illinois)
Climate Reality Project: Chicago Metro Chapter (Illinois)
Coalition to Stop CO2 Pipelines (Illinois)
Faith in Place (Illinois)
Fox Valley Peace and Justice Group (Illinois)
Illinois Environmental Council (Illinois)
Illinois People’s Action (Illinois)
Nuclear Energy Information Services (Illinois)
Prairie Rivers Network (Illinois)
Save Our Illinois Land (Illinois)
Third Act (Illinois)
Unitarian-Universalists Advocacy Network of Illinois (Illinois)
BOLD Alliance
Commission Shift CURE
Institute for Policy Studies Climate Policy Program
Public Goods Institute
Science and Environmental Health Network
350 Bay Area Action
Signatories
ACES 4 Youth
Alliance for Affordable Energy
Alliance for the Wild Rockies
American Holistic Nurses Association (AHNA)
Benicians for a Safe and Healthy Community
Better Path Coalition
Biofuelwatch
Blacks in Green
BOLD Alliance
Breathe Easy Susquehanna County
Breathe Project
Carbondale Concerned Citizens
Center for Biological Diversity
Center for International Environmental Law
Central Illinois Healthy Community Alliance
Citizens Against Heartland Greenwashing Projects
Citizens Against Predatory Pipelines
Clean Power Lake County
Climate Code Blue
Climate Equity Policy Center
Climate Reality Project Greater New
Orleans Chapter
Climate Reality Project: Chicago Metro
Chapter
Coalition Against Death Alley
Coalition Against the Rockaway Pipeline
Coalition to Stop CO2 Pipelines
Commission Shift
Communities Against Carbon Transport & Injection (CACTI)
Concerned Citizens of St. John
Concerned Health Professionals of New York
Concerned Health Professionals of PA
CURE
Dakota Resource Council
Deep South Center for Environmental Justice
Delaware Riverkeeper Network
Don’t Gas the Meadowlands
Earth Ethics, Inc.
Eco-Justice Collaborative
Eco.Logic
Elders Climate Action
Elders Climate Action (ECA) Northern
California (NorCal) Chapter
Elders Climate Action (ECA) Southern
California (SoCal) Chapter
Elmirans & Friends Against Fracking
Faith Coalition foe the Common Good
Faith in Place (Illinois)
Faith in Place Action Fund
Fenceline Watch
First Unitarian Universalist Society of New Haven, Social Justice Cttee
Food & Water Watch
For a Better Bayou
Fox Valley Electric Auto Association
Fox Valley Peace and Justice Group
FracTracker Alliance
FreshWater Accountability Project
Friends of the Earth
Go Green Winnetka
Good Neighbor Steering Committee of
Benicis
Great Plains Action Society
Greater Highland Area Concerned Citizens
Greater New Orleans Interfaith Climate
Coalition
Greenfire Coalition Writers’ Forum
Health Professionals for a Healthy Climate
Healthy Gulf
Human Impact Partners
Illinois Environmental Council
Illinois People’s Action
Illinois Water Authorty Association
Inclusive Louisiana
Institute for Policy Studies Climate Policy Program
Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement
ISEE-Justice40 Consortium
JPAP
lllinois People’s Action
Louisiana Just Recovery Network
Louisiana League of Conscious Voters
Metro East Green Alliance
Mi Familia en Accion
Micah 6:8 Mission
Move Past Plastic (MPP)
NAACP Peoria Branch
New Mexico Climate Justice
New Mexico Environmental Law Center
New York Climate Action Group
Ní Btháska Stand Collective
No False Solutions PA
No North Brooklyn Pipeline Alliance
North American Climate, Conservation and Environment(NACCE)
Nuclear Energy Information Service (NEIS)
Ocean Conservation Research
Oil and Gas Action Network
Oil Change International
Oilfield Witness
Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility
People for a Healthy Environment
Peoria Riverkeeper
Physicians for Social Responsibility
Physicians for Social Responsibility Los Angeles
Physicians for Social Responsibility Florida
Physicians for Social Responsibility
Pennsylvania
Physicians for Social Responsibility Texas
Port Arthur Community Action
Network(PACAN)
Prairie Group of the Sierra Club
Prairie Rivers Network
Presente.org
Public Goods Institute
Resistor Sisterhood
San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social
Responsibility
Santa Cruz Climate Action Network
Save Our Illinois Land
Science and Environmental Health Network
Sierra Club – Houston Group
Social Action Council, Unitarian Universalist
Church of Urbana-Champaign
South Bronx Unite
Sunflower Alliance
Sustainable Springfield Inc
Terra Advocati
Texas Campaign for the Environment
Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services
Texas Permian Future Generations
The Enviro Show
The Park Church in Elmira
The People’s Justice Council
The Raices Collab Project
The Texas Drought Project
The Wei LLC
Third Act Illinois
TRIAA-Divest!
Turtle Island Restoration Network
Unitarian Universalist Advocacy Network of Illinois
Unitarian Universalist Church in Anaheim
United For Clean Energy
United Native Americans
Universalist Unitarian Church of Peoria
Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment
Vermont Climate and Health Alliance
Vessel Project of Louisiana
Veterans for Climate Justice
Washington Physicians for Social
Responsibility
Waterspirit
WE ACT for Environmental Justice
Wellington United Church of Christ
Western Organization of Resource Councils
WindSolarUSA, Inc.
1000 Grandmothers for Future Generations
198 methods
350 Bay Area Action
350 Chicago
350 Eugene
350 New Orleans
350 Seattle
350 Wisconsin
350 Hawaii
Refer also to:
Must Watch: Dr. Sandra Steingraber on Pore Space in context of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
Huge “common sense” victory! New York Assembly wisely overwhelmingly passes CO2 frac ban, 97-50!
CO2 in Stream, Dead Ducks Prompt Wyo. DEQ Citation
The Role of the Upper Geosphere in Mitigating CO2 Surface Releases in Wellbore Leakage Scenarios
The cement seals can degrade by chemical action or by fracturing, which increases the effective permeability of the cement. The seal between the cement and the casing and between the annulus and the surrounding formations can also degrade or be faulty at the time of cement emplacement
Possible indicators for CO 2 leakage along wells by Bachu and Watson, 8th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, Trondheim, Norway, 2006
… Storage safety refers to the potential harm to other resources, equity and life that a CO2 leak may entail.
The probability and effects of leakage from CO2 storage sites need assessment by both the operator and regulatory agency during the application and permitting process, during the operational phase and after site abandonment [3]. Any fluid in the subsurface, especially a buoyant one like CO2 , will migrate laterally within the injection unit and may leak upwards across formations through faults and fractures and/or defective wells [1, 4]. The potential for CO2 leakage through fractures and faults can be well managed through proper geological characterization and selection of the storage site, and through proper operating procedures. Managing the potential for CO2 leakage through wells is more difficult. Exploration and production wells have been drilled, completed and abandoned since the middle of the 19th century, with variable technology and materials, and with no or under variable regulatory regimes. Well materials (cements, steel, elastomers, etc.) will or may degrade over time, particularly in the presence of corrosive agents such as saline formation water and CO2 [5, 6]. Thus, the potential for leakage through existing wells needs to be assessed for site selection and remediation. New wells will also be subjected to the same in-situ conditions as the existing wells.
Dr Tony Ingraffea subsequently found new wells to be worse leakers than older ones, which makes sense given the oil and gas industry’s relentless greed, lies, and demanding degegulation which has been consistently granted by our deregulators, notably Alberta’s “No Duty of Care” legally immune AER. …
Factors Affecting or Indicating Potential Wellbore Leakage by Watson and Bachu at the Alberta regulator, AER (when it was EUB), no less!
Bachu, S., Buschkuehle, B.E., Haug, K. and Michael, K. (2008): Subsurface characterization of the Edmonton-area acid-gas injection operations; Energy Resources Conservation Board, ERCBNow AER/AGS Special Report 92, 134 p.
… From Page 88:
Figure 59 shows the extent of the Acheson original Blairmore T and subsequent St. Albert-Big Lake Ostracod A pools, and of the Strathfield (undefined) gas reservoir in the context of lithofacies changes in the Lower Mannville Basal Quartz and Ellerslie formations. When approval was granted for acid gas injection at Acheson, the regulatory agency required the operator to file annually with EUB and each other operator in the Acheson Blairmore T and St. Albert-Big Lake Ostracod A pools progress reports that “shall include the impact of acid gas injection on the performance of offsetting producing wells”. In March 2004 the operator at Acheson reported that CO2 was detected in 2003 in well 10-22-53-26W4 in the St. Albert-Big Lake Ostracod A pool, located at 3,625 m north from the acid-gas injection well. No H2S has been detected in the produced gas. Since at Acheson the average composition of the acid gas is 87% CO2 and 11% H2S (Table 14), with H2S being denser and more viscous than CO2, it is expected that CO2 would show first at a producing well. In addition, diagenetic processes within the reservoir could have reduced the H2S concentration in the injected acid gas as a result of pyrite precipitation, if an iron source was available. The issue was brought to EUB’s attention andwas heading to a hearing, but the operator at Acheson has indicated to the regulatory agency that it has initiated an Appropriate Dispute Resolution process with the operator of the offset producing well to address the issue of CO2 breakthrough, and that this situation “will be addressed pursuant to the terms of the Mediated Settlement Agreement”.
This case shows that, after 13 years of injection, CO2 has migrated northward a distance of [nearly 4 km] mostly under the combined drive of injection and production. The drive into the St. Albert-Big Lake Ostracod A gas pool has increased lately with the large spike in gas production from this pool (Figure 57b). There are five producing wells much closer to the acid-gas injection well (Figure 59) that did not report CO2 breakthrough, but these wells are owned by the same operator that operated until recently the Acheson acid-gas injection site. If acid gas broke through at any of these wells, it is most likely that the operator just stripped the acid gas from the sour reservoir gas and re-injected it, as the produced gas in this area is sour to begin with. Understanding the migration path and fate of the injected acid gas at Acheson requires a separate study that is beyond the scope of this report. …