AMODEI’S MINING BILL RETURNS: A bill that’s coming back around to the House floor is mining legislation that got caught in the crossfire in a feud between House conservatives and GOP leadership – with six Republicans voting with Democrats to send the bill back into committee.
The details, ICYMI: Rep. Mark Amodei’s bill, the Mining Regulatory Clarity Act, was voted down on Wednesday in a procedural vote on the House floor. The measure, which would clarify that mining companies can store waste on land regardless if it has economically viable minerals underneath, is now back on the schedule for Rules Committee consideration.
Who voted against it: Members of the conservative faction of the House GOP caucus voted with Democrats to “recommit” the bill and send it back to committee. Those members were Reps. Andy Biggs, Dan Bishop, Eli Crane, Matt Gaetz, Bob Good, and Anna Paulina Luna.
But, why? House conservatives have been airing out their frustrations with leadership through the tanking of procedural votes, such as votes on the rule governing debate of a bill. This, however, was a smaller protest vote.
According to a spokesperson for Gaetz, his vote to recommit stood as a “protest vote.” The spokesperson did not provide further details on what the vote was specifically protesting.
Spokespeople for Amodei, Biggs, Bishop, Crane, Good, and Luna did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
But, there are some clues: Earlier this week, the House voted on a contentious antisemitism bill that drew pushback from the right flank. House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rep. Bruce Westerman told E&E News that he believed Republicans voted to recommit the mining bill to express objections with the antisemitism bill.
But, one Democrat is seizing the moment: Following Wednesday’s vote, Natural Resources Ranking Member Raúl Grijalva sent a letter to Westerman, asking for the committee to reconsider a Democratic amendment that would address foreign adversary concerns.
“Sending a bill back to committee in this manner is a historic step not seen in more than 32 years,” the lawmaker wrote. “Now that the bill is back in our committee, I would have hoped this would finally be the end of the road for this toxic mining free-for-all mess of a bill. And it is clearly the bipartisan will of the House that, if this bill is not entirely laid to bed, that at minimum it receive full and careful reconsideration by the Committee on Natural Resources, especially as to the foreign adversary loophole.”
But: Since the measure is already slated for House Rules Committee consideration, it’s unlikely that the bill will be considered further in the Natural Resources Committee.
Another bill that’s on our radar for next week: A bill from Rep. Debbie Lesko, which would prohibit the Energy Secretary from issuing any new energy conservation standards that are not “technologically feasible and economically justified,” will be considered by the Rules Committee next week as well.
Welcome to Daily on Energy, written by Washington Examiner Energy and Environment writers Breanne Deppisch (@breanne_dep) and Nancy Vu (@NancyVu99). Email bdeppisch@washingtonexaminer dot com or nancy.vu@washingtonexaminer dot com 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.
FALLOUT FROM OPEC COLLUSION ACCUSATION AGAINST PIONEER FOUNDER: Oil industry figures are newly alarmed about the possibility of regulatory scrutiny from the Federal Trade Commission following the agency’s accusation yesterday that Pioneer Natural Resources founder Scott Sheffield colluded with OPEC+ on production in the Permian Basin.
The allegation came alongside the agency’s decision to greenlight Pioneer’s acquisition by Exxon Mobil (which officially closed today), which otherwise would have been taken as good news by the industry.
James Lucier, an analyst at Capital Alpha Partners, said that the implications of the collusion accusation will extend beyond the Pioneer purchase. “The FTC has not to date taken an adversarial approach toward oil industry mergers . . . This relative hands-off policy is no more,” he wrote in a note to clients, according to the Financial Times.
The FTC’s claim that Sheffield sought to coordinate production with OPEC+ was based in part on texts and WhatsApp messages he sent. But it also faulted his efforts during the start of the pandemic to get the Railroad Commission of Texas to impose production cuts on producers as prices plummeted, and even comments he made at dinners hosted by the late OPEC secretary-general Mohammed Barkindo. Those dinners have been attended by other prominent oil industry executives.
Some figures quoted by the FT suggested that Sheffield was merely speaking on behalf of the industry with his comments that were singled out by the FTC.
In a dissent from the FTC statement, the two Republican commissioners wrote that they disagreed with the premise that the merger would result in the market being susceptible to coordination. Chairwoman Lina Khan, though, tweeted yesterday afternoon that “second-guessing their clear efforts to collude dispenses with regulatory humility.”
LAID-OFF EMPLOYEES QUESTION SUPERCHARGER MAINTENANCE: Members of the Supercharger team dismissed from Tesla this week are raising doubts about the company’s ability to maintain the network of fast EV chargers.
InsideEVs published a story with comments from laid-off members of the team, many of whom said that the demands for maintenance were only increasing and that they worried about Tesla’s ability to ensure uptime for the existing chargers.
CEO Elon Musk had said that the company would focus on maintenance while acknowledging that the layoffs would slow the expansion of the charger network.
One former employee told InsideEVs, “We couldn’t keep up. And now the network is even larger…. There’s gonna be a lot more issues that could possibly come up.”
Another said: “What I’m hearing is, there’s still some guys in the field, but they’re gonna be pretty over-tasked.”
TREASURY EASES FINAL RULES FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE TAX CREDITS: The Biden administration has eased restrictions for its electric vehicle tax credit, giving automakers more time to adjust to sourcing requirements meant to reduce reliance on China for materials, Nancy reports.
The Treasury Department announced Friday that it has finalized rules for a tax credit that serves to encourage sales of electric vehicles while taking aim at foreign entities of concern, such as China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, and their grip on critical minerals and EV battery components.
But the rule determining which EVs are eligible for the tax credit exempts compliance with the restrictions for “certain impracticable-to-trace” battery materials — particularly graphite, the main component in a lithium-ion battery anode, and whose supply chain is heavily dominated by China — until 2027, giving automakers two more years than in the previous proposal.
The finalized rules stand as a concession to automakers, which urged the administration to loosen the proposed requirements, as some stated it was impractical to try to block Chinese-produced graphite when the country dominates the supply chain. Many argued that, without a reprieve, many electric vehicles wouldn’t be able to qualify for the tax credit. Some groups, such as Volkswagen, have called for graphite to be completely exempt from restrictions under the rule.
One Dem isn’t happy: The rule is getting pushback from a key Democrat, Sen. Joe Manchin, one of the authors of the Inflation Reduction Act. Immediately following the rule’s release, the West Virginia Democrat said he plans to introduce a disapproval resolution that would undo the Biden administration’s rule, blasting the regulation as going against the legislative intent of the original bill. Read more here.
RUNDOWN
Financial Times Canada’s oil industry cuts reliance on US market as pipeline expands
Bloomberg A Billionaire Wanted to Save 1 Trillion Trees by 2030. It’s Not Going Great.
New York Times Oil Companies Expand Offshore Drilling, Pointing to Energy Needs