Policy Overview

Regulating methane emissions through the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is a central component of the Biden Administration’s plans to reduce methane emissions by 30% below 2020 levels by 2030. The initial November 2021 rule proposes to update performance standards and requirements around monitoring and repairing leaks for both new and existing wells. Until now, older wells have not been subject to EPA methane standards.

In November 2022, the EPA released a supplemental proposal to its methane regulations. This second part of the rule builds on the initial proposal by specifying rules for methane emission leak detection and repair, including at smaller wells, alongside providing more details on key components such as flaring and technology use.

Policy Status

Initial proposal released for consultation between November 2021 and January 2022, supplemental proposal released for consultation November 2022 until February 2023

Evidence Profile

118899

Key

opposing not supporting mixed/unclear
supporting strongly supporting

Policy Engagement Overview

Following heavy negative lobbying on the November 2021 EPA methane proposal, the oil and gas industry has continued to take positions to oppose and weaken the November 2022 supplementary proposal.

Latest Lobbying Trends

Long-term Lobbying Trends

  • Several powerful cross-sector and oil and gas sector specific industry associations lobbied to weaken the initial, January 2022 proposed methane standards, such as the American Petroleum Institute (API), Gas Association (AGA), US Chamber of Commerce (USC), and National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). Among other arguments, the API, USC, and AGA each challenged the EPA’s legal authority under the Clean Air Act to require states to update methane emissions performance standards for existing facilities.

  • Oil and gas companies have taken differing positions on the proposed regulations. ExxonMobil, Shell, and BP took mixed positions, while Chevron attempted to weaken key components of the regulation by opposing measures around monitoring and repairing methane leaks, emphasizing feasibility and cost effectiveness concerns, and questioning the legal basis for ‘community monitoring.’

  • The largest utilities in the US also engaged with differing positions. Ten utilities submitted a negative joint comment, while four – Consolidated Edison, Exelon, National Grid, and Pacific Gas & Electric – submitted a positive joint comment. National Grid engaged with contradictory positions, joining both the negative and positive joint comments alongside its own positive comment.

  • Current oil and gas lobbying efforts contradict recent top-line statements from the industry in support of direct federal regulation of methane, including from the AGA and USC, as well as companies Shell, BP, and ExxonMobil among others.

Impacts on Policy Ambition

Following the release of the EPA’s supplemental proposal in November 2022 and public consultation process until February 2023, the policy is likely to be finalized later this year. InfluenceMap will continue to track the progress of this policy.

Policy Status

Initial proposal released for consultation between November 2021 and January 2022, supplemental proposal released for consultation November 2022 until February 2023

Evidence Profile

118899

Key

opposing not supporting mixed/unclear
supporting strongly supporting

Live Lobbying Alerts

BP supports US Environmental Protection Agency's 2022 Methane Regulations

25 November 2022

In a 20th November Financial Times article, BP’s head of US business stated support for the US Environmental Protection Agency’s 2022 Methane Regulations, and emphasized the need to stop flaring.

API advocates for removal of oil and gas leasing restrictions

03 November 2022

On July 6th 2022, the Vice President of Upstream Policy at the American Petroleum Institute (API), Kevin O’Scannlain, wrote an op-ed in Real Clear Energy advocating for the removal of restrictions on oil and gas leasing in US federal lands and waters. O’Scannlain also called for a “robust” 5-year leasing program in the Outer Continental Shelf. The article also opposed the US Environmental Protection Agency’s regulation of methane in the Permian Basin, calling it “unproductive” and “burdensome”, and went on to use this argument to support the expansion of Section 45Q tax credits for the development of carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS).

Entities Engaged on Policy

Influencemap Performance BandOrganizationEngagement Intensity
CBP61EnergyEurope
CShell64EnergyEurope
B-AES Corporation37UtilitiesNorth America
D-Williams Companies Inc12EnergyNorth America
DExxonMobil50EnergyNorth America
D-Chevron49EnergyNorth America
D+Occidental Petroleum29EnergyNorth America
D-Kinder Morgan19EnergyNorth America
D-Devon Energy16EnergyNorth America
D-ConocoPhillips38EnergyNorth America
DDominion Energy50UtilitiesNorth America
D+Alliant Energy Corp20UtilitiesNorth America
D+Duke Energy42UtilitiesNorth America
DEntergy Corp28UtilitiesNorth America
DEvergy11UtilitiesNorth America
C-NextEra Energy34UtilitiesNorth America
C+National Grid42UtilitiesEurope
C-NRG Energy36UtilitiesNorth America
C-XCEL Energy41UtilitiesNorth America
C-CMS Energy Corp20UtilitiesNorth America
B-Consolidated Edison36UtilitiesNorth America
C+Exelon62UtilitiesNorth America
C+Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E)61UtilitiesNorth America
C+Morgan Stanley14FinancialsNorth America