WHAT’S HAPPENING TODAY: Good afternoon and happy Wednesday, readers! Senate Democrats indicated today that they are likely to withhold support for permitting reform due to recent actions by the Trump administration.
In today’s Daily on Energy, Callie and Maydeen also cover the Department of Transportation announcement that it will terminate New York’s congestion pricing for vehicles, claiming it harms the working class.
Welcome to Daily on Energy, written by Washington Examiner energy and environment writers Callie Patteson (@CalliePatteson) and Maydeen Merino (@MaydeenMerino). Email cpatteson@washingtonexaminer dot com or mmerino@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.
THE PERMITTING PAWN: As permitting reform took center stage this morning in a Senate hearing, some Democrats indicated it may be more difficult to secure bipartisan support than expected due to early actions made by the Trump administration.
The details: The Environment and Public Works committee kicked off permitting discussions in the Senate today, featuring testimony from Associated General Contractors of America’s Leah Pilconis, National Association of Home Builders’ Carl Harris, ClearPath’s Jeremy Harrell, Clean Air Task Force’s Nicole Pavia, and Brent Booker with the Laborers’ International Union of North America. Throughout the hearing, both Republican and Democratic lawmakers agreed that permitting reform was vital for increased infrastructure development, housing construction, and energy advancements.
Ranking Member Sheldon Whitehouse indicated at the start of the hearing, though, that Democrats may not be as willing to meet in the middle as they were during discussions at the end of the last Congress.
“A word of warning, however: Democrats cannot agree to any permitting reform unless and until the Trump administration ends its lawless disregard for congressional authority and judicial orders,” Whitehouse said in his opening remarks, pointing to billions of obligated funds that remain frozen as one example.
“Until the administration shows it will honor its oath to faithfully and impartially execute the laws, we can have zero confidence that any legislative compromise on permitting reform will be executed lawfully,” the Rhode Island Democrat said. “It falls to my Republican friends to bring this lawless unconstitutional madness to an end. It’s on you.”
Why does this matter? While there is broad bipartisan support for permitting reform in general, Democratic help in theory is not needed to get something passed, with Republicans in control of the Senate and House. The GOP could push to include permitting reform in reconciliation – the legislative process that allows for bills to bypass the filibuster and pass with only a simple majority. However, members of both parties have recently thrown cold water on the idea, saying reconciliation isn’t the pathway for passing meaningful permitting reform.
As a result, any pushback from Democrats could delay negotiations on legislation required to speed up approvals for energy projects, construction, and more across the country. With permitting reform in reconciliation appearing to be less likely, withholding bipartisan support could give Democrats the ability to push back against the Trump administration’s sweeping use of executive power, which has led to the layoffs of thousands of federal workers and dismantling of agencies like USAID.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENDS NEW YORK CONGESTION PRICING: Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has terminated New York’s congestion pricing for vehicles, claiming the toll harms the working class.
“The recent imposition of this [Center Business District Tolling Program] pilot project upon residents, businesses, and commuters left highway users without any free highway alternative on which to travel within the relevant area. Moreover, the revenues generated under this pilot program are directed toward the transit system as opposed to the highways. I do not believe that this is a fair deal,” Duffy wrote in a letter to New York Gov. Kathy Hochul.
New York implemented the program in January, but it was delayed by Hochul for months due to some opposing the tax, stating it was too much. Last month, Hochul lowered the toll cost from $15 to $9.
The department terminated the program because it is “unprecedented and provides no toll-free option for many drivers who want or need to travel by vehicle in this major urbanized area.”
Secondly, the toll’s purpose was to raise money for transit rather than impose a toll for congestion reduction. The Department said the program is contrary to the purpose of the Vehicle Pricing Pilot program.
The MTA almost immediately sued Duffy, calling his decision a “baseless effort” to deprive the city of the program’s benefits.
Read more by Washington Examiner’s Ross O’Keefe here.
EUROPE’S BIGGEST BANK ABANDONS NET-ZERO GOALS: HSBC has abandoned its net-zero emissions targets previously set for 2030, pushing back the bank’s climate goals by 20 years.
The details: HSBC revealed it would be revising its emissions goals today in its annual strategic report for 2024. The bank pointed to the slower-than-anticipated transition to renewable and clean energy sources “across the real economy” as the driving force behind its altered goals. HSBC now expects to achieve 40% reduced emissions across its operations, business travel and supply chain by 2030. The company therein hopes to achieve net-zero by 2050.
The bank did say it remains committed to achieving net-zero emissions, but it insisted that the company is limited in how it can influence the industry and customers to decarbonize at the same rate.
“There are fundamental prerequisites, outside of our control, which impact our ability to meet our 2030 interim financed emissions targets and ultimately reach our net zero ambition,” the strategic report read, also blaming customer preferences, relevant policy, government leadership, and energy diversification. “Until the real economy makes significant progress in decarbonising, our own progress towards our 2030 targets and 2050 net zero ambition will be constrained.”
Growing trend: HSBC’s decision to punt its 2030 climate targets is further evidence of a growing trend that Wall Street has lost interest in ESG (environmental, social, and governance) initiatives. In the last few months, a number of major banks, including Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and even the Federal Reserve, have left international green networks, such as the Net-Zero Banking Alliance.
CEASEFIRE IN UKRAINE MAY NOT INCREASE RUSSIAN OIL OUTPUT: Wall Street has thrown cold water on the idea that exports of Russian oil will increase and support the market if a ceasefire is negotiated with Ukraine.
The details: Goldman Sachs made the prediction today as the Trump administration has entered negotiations with Russia to end its war in Ukraine. While a ceasefire could result in the U.S. easing sanctions on Russia’s energy sector, the bank suggested that Russia’s oil output has actually been more constrained by OPEC+ production restrictions, according to Reuters.
“We believe that Russia crude oil production is constrained by its OPEC+ 9.0 million barrels per day production target rather than current sanctions, which are affecting the destination but not the volume of oil exports,” Goldman Sachs said.
For months, OPEC+ has delayed its plans to gradually increase oil production and is currently poised to ease restrictions starting in April. However, Goldman Sachs predicted today that the oil producing bloc may push that back again to July amid weak global demand and a potential increase in supply of crude from non-member nations, like the U.S. As a result, the bank suggests these restrictions would continue to restrain Russian oil production.
ADMINISTRATION REPORTEDLY USING ‘EMERGENCY’ CLASSIFICATIONS TO FAST-TRACK FOSSIL FUEL PROJECTS: In a seeming effort to accelerate the president’s “Drill, Baby, Drill” agenda, the Trump administration is taking steps to expedite fossil fuel projects like pipelines or power plants.
The details: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers recently created a new class of “emergency” permits that would make hundreds of fossil fuel-related energy projects eligible for fast-tracked approvals, according to a New York Times report. The Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for distributing permits to any individual, company, or agency that is seeking to build projects in U.S. waters.
It is not uncommon for the Army Corps of Engineers to issue emergency permits for various projects, such as for repairs to roads. However, those are typically related to natural disasters or similar tragedies. The recent decision to issue emergency permits for energy projects has been reportedly tied to the president’s executive order declaring a National Energy Emergency in the U.S. In that order, Trump directed federal agencies to use “to the fullest extent possible and consistent with applicable law, the emergency Army Corps permitting provisions to facilitate the Nation’s energy supply.”
It remains unclear how certain projects are being selected for permits under this new classification or if it will allow certain developers to bypass the National Environmental Policy Act. Some projects expected to now be fast-tracked include an oil and gas pipeline in Wisconsin and Michigan as well as a liquified natural gas export facility in Louisiana, according to the report.
“The Department of Defense will fully execute and implement all directives outlined in the executive orders issued by the president, ensuring that they are carried out with the utmost professionalism, efficiency, and in alignment with national security objectives,” agency spokesman Doug Garman told the New York Times.
Some reaction: Unsurprisingly, many environmentalists are up in arms about the decision, claiming the administration is using “false claims” of an emergency to push the administration’s agenda. David Bookbinder, director of law and policy at the Environmental Integrity Project, told the outlet that the move poses a risk to both humans and the environment. “This end run around the normal environmental review process is not only harmful for our waters, but is illegal under the Corps’ own emergency permitting regulations,” Bookbinder said.
ZERO-EMISSION VEHICLE MAKER NIKOLA FILES FOR BANKRUPTCY: Arizona-based zero emissions vehicle manufacturer Nikola filed for bankruptcy following financial struggles and difficulty finding investors.
Nikola filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. The battery-powered car maker filed a motion to seek approval to auction and sell its assets. Nikola has $47 million in cash to fund its bankruptcy process, implement the sale process, and exit bankruptcy, it said.
Nikola, which is known for producing battery-electric and hydrogen fuel cell commercial trucks, said it plans to continue limited service and support operations for trucks on the road, including its hydrogen fueling operations, through the end of March.
“In recent months, we have taken numerous actions to raise capital, reduce our liabilities, clean up our balance sheet, and preserve cash to sustain our operations,” said Steve Girsky, the president and CEO of the company.
“Unfortunately, our very best efforts have not been enough to overcome these significant challenges, and the Board has determined that Chapter 11 represents the best possible path forward under the circumstances for the Company and its stakeholders,” he said.
SWEDEN’S SUPREME COURT REJECTS GRETA THUNBERG CLIMATE LAWSUIT: Sweden’s Supreme Court ruled against a lawsuit brought by climate activist Greta Thunberg and others claiming that the state violated its citizens’ human rights by not limiting greenhouse gas emissions, Reuters reports.
The climate activists filed a class action lawsuit in 2022 with a district court. The plaintiffs wanted Sweden to take more action to limit global warming to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit. In 2023, the district court asked the Sweden Supreme Court to clarify whether the lawsuit could be tried in a Swedish Court after the state asked to dismiss it.
“A court cannot decide that the parliament or the government must take any specific action. The political bodies decide independently on which specific climate measures Sweden should take,” Sweden’s Supreme Court said in a statement today.
“The Supreme Court states in its decision that such a case could only concern the question of whether individuals’ rights under the convention have been violated, not what specific measures the state is obliged to take,” it added.
RUNDOWN
The Washington Post We may be able to trap climate pollution in ordinary rocks
The Guardian Developing world urges rich nations to defy Trump’s ‘climate nihilism’
Inside Climate News Lethal Greed: How Corporate Manipulation of Science and Regulation Makes People Sick