Organisation Name
American Petroleum Institute (API)
InfluenceMap Query
GHG Emission Standards
Data Source
Media Reports
 
 

Score for this Data / Query Cell

-1.58

InfluenceMap has researched and collated the following pieces of evidence associated with the data source and query indicated above. Extraordinary information is indicated by a coloured flag in the upper right corner. Evidence items in order of data inputted with exceptional items first.

 

Opposing GHG emissions standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing specific GHG emissions standards. Taking legal action against the EPA Clean Power Plan. (Union of Concerned Scientists, July 2015, p 12)

Extract from Source:

More recently, in 2011, the API protested the EPA’s decision to regulate carbon pollution under the Clean Air Act, joining a coalition of industry groups to file a lawsuit challenging the EPA’s authority to regulate global warming emissions. The API’s lawsuit challenged the EPA on the grounds of the very doubts about climate science the trade group had worked for years to manufacture, stating that the “EPA professes to be 90–99% certain that anthropogenic emissions are mostly responsible for ‘unusually high current planetary temperatures,’ but the record does not remotely support this level of certainty”

Created: 20/08/2015 Last edited: 11/04/2017

 

Opposing GHG emissions targets

InfluenceMap Comment:

Filing a lawsuit against the EPA to oppose a GHG emissions standard, New Source Performance Standard (Imperial Valley News, August 2016)

Extract from Source:

Los Angeles, California - Attorney General Kamala D. Harris, 8 other states and the city of Chicago today filed a motion to intervene in support of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) New Source Performance Standards to limit greenhouse gas emissions, specifically methane, from oil and natural gas operations. [...] Since the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the emissions standards, Alabama, Arizona, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, North Dakota Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, South Carolina, West Virginia, and Wisconsin, as well as the American Petroleum Institute, oil and gas industry associations, and others have filed lawsuits challenging the rules. California and 8 other states are intervening to defend the greenhouse gas emissions standards.

Created: 01/09/2016 Last edited: 01/09/2016

 

Opposing GHG emissions standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Actively opposing Methane emission standards (Missoula Independent, February 2017)

Extract from Source:

The American Petroleum Institute, the oil and gas industry's chief lobbying arm, has doubled down on efforts to eliminate the BLM's wasted-gas rule, declaring shortly after the election that overturning it was a top priority. API has spent more than $13 million on lobbying over the last two years and, according to the New York Times, the energy industry spends about $300 million a year lobbying Congress, deploying an army of lobbyists—three for each member.

Created: 13/03/2017 Last edited: 13/03/2017

 

Opposing GHG emissions standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing methane emission standards (PRS Newswire, May 2017)

Extract from Source:

API expressed disappointment with a no vote to stop an unnecessary, costly and duplicative methane regulation, but said it was encouraged by the Interior Department's review of the rule as part of an executive order signed in March. "America's natural gas and oil industry supports commonsense regulation, but the BLM's technically flawed rule on methane emissions is an unnecessary and costly misstep," said API Upstream and Industry Operations Group Director Erik Milito. "The rule could impede U.S. energy production while reducing local and federal government revenues."While it is disappointing that the Senate did not act to correct the rule more quickly, we look forward to working with the administration on policies that continue our commitment to safely produce the energy that Americans rely on, help consumers, create jobs, strengthen our national security, and protect our environment."

Created: 12/05/2017 Last edited: 12/05/2017

 

Opposing GHG emissions standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Taking legal action against emissions standards in the US (Natural Gas Intel, August 2017)

Extract from Source:

A federal appeals court Thursday rejected a request by the oil and gas industry and allies to reconsider a court panel's decision last month to lift a stay of Obama-era rules governing new sources of methane emissions. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia by an 8-3 voted denied a motion to rehear arguments over the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposed rules governing fugitive emissions, pneumatic pumps and professional engineer certification requirements as outlined in updates to the agency's New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). Last May, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt proposed a 90-day stay over the rules, but a three-judge panel in early July lifted the stay following a 2-1 vote. Earlier this month, the American Petroleum Institute (API) and other trade associations representing the energy industry filed a reply in support of a petition to rehear the case en banc. They argued that the panel erred when it said the stay constituted a reviewable final agency action. However, the appellate court disagreed. "Industry intervenor-respondents' and states intervenor-respondents' petitions for rehearing en banc, the response thereto, and the reply were circulated to the full court, and a vote was requested," the court said. "Thereafter, a majority of the judges eligible to participate did not vote in favor of the petitions. Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ordered that the petitions be denied." [...] In a 16-page letter dated July 27, API’s Matthew Todd, senior policy adviser, said the EPA has "multiple sources of legal authority" to extend the compliance deadlines for the NSPS updates, and that the rulemaking authority granted under the Clean Air Act allows for a two-year stay.

Created: 14/08/2017 Last edited: 14/08/2017

 

Opposing GHG emission standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Is promoting voluntary methane emission 'framework' whilst opposing regulation (Argus Media, October 2017)

Extract from Source:

The largest lobbying group for the US oil and gas sector is considering approving a voluntary framework for curbing emissions of the greenhouse gas methane in hopes of deterring mandatory regulation in the future. [...] Methane emissions from the oil and gas industry account for 3pc of greenhouse gas emissions in the US, wiping out some of the climate benefits of replacing coal-fired power plants with natural gas. Environmentalists often cite the industry's methane emissions to justify their opposition to building natural gas infrastructure. [...] But API and other industry groups opposed efforts by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other agencies to start to regulate methane because of concerns about their cost and the prospect of additional oversight. President Donald Trump's administration is trying to delay those regulations for two years and may rescind them entirely.

Created: 14/11/2017 Last edited: 14/11/2017

 

Not supporting GHG emission standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting roll back of technical requirments under EPA methane regulations (NBC News, September 2018)

Extract from Source:

The Trump administration is seeking to ease Obama-era restrictions on methane gas emissions, touting the benefits for energy companies while admitting the changes could harm air quality and human health.   Under a new proposal that the Environmental Protection Agency released on Tuesday, oil and gas companies would be permitted to conduct less frequent inspections for methane leaks at their facilities and would be given more time to make repairs. [...]   Oil and gas companies lauded the Trump administration for its proposal, saying they would help the industry while protecting public health. "We welcome EPA's efforts to get this right and the proposed changes could ensure that the rule is based on best engineering practices and cost-effective," Howard Feldman of the American Petroleum Institute said in a statement

Created: 16/01/2019 Last edited: 16/01/2019

 

Strongly opposing methane regulations

InfluenceMap Comment:

API actively lobbied the EPA to weaken methane regulation between 2015-2018 (Unearthed, 2019)

Extract from Source:

The API lobbied the EPA to halve the frequency of inspections from twice a year to once, exempt oil wells and remove requirements for leak detection plans to be signed off by qualified engineers.[...] API was ultimately successful in persuading the Trump administration to reduce the number of mandatory inspections, amongst a raft of other rollbacks.

Created: 15/11/2019 Last edited: 15/11/2019

 

Opposing GHG emissions standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing specific methane emissions standards (International Business Times, March 10 2016)

Extract from Source:

Obama’s methane proposals face substantial pushback from the American oil-and-gas industry, which has argued new rules are unnecessary, since companies are cutting emissions voluntarily. U.S. methane emissions fell by nearly 15 percent between 1990 and 2013, thanks largely to reductions in the oil-and-gas industry, the EPA said, although regulators estimated emissions would rise 25 percent this decade unless they are checked. “Additional regulations on methane by the administration could discourage the shale energy revolution that has helped America lead the world in reducing emissions while significantly lowering the costs of energy to consumers,” Kyle Isakower, vice president of regulatory and economic policy at the American Petroleum Institute, a leading industry group, said in an emailed statement Thursday. “The administration is catering to environmental extremists at the expense of American consumers.”

Created: 23/03/2016 Last edited: 11/04/2017

 

Opposing GHG emissions targets

InfluenceMap Comment:

Has stated that they will be agressively lobbying the future Trump administration against methane regulations (Washington Post, November 2016)

Extract from Source:

“Methane is a top priority and we’ll be pursuing that aggressively,” said Jack Gerard, the president of the American Petroleum Institute, on a conference call with reporters Thursday. Gerard said recent Obama administration methane regulations have added “unnecessary cost and confusion and it seems to demonstrate no benefit for all the associated cost,” arguing the rules often overlap with regulations that states already have in place. The Environmental Protection Agency recently revised upwards its estimates of methane emissions coming from the oil and gas industry, rendering it the largest source of U.S. methane emissions (other sources include wetlands, landfills, and most importantly, ruminant animals like cattle). However, the American Petroleum Institute has contested that revision.

Created: 08/12/2016 Last edited: 08/12/2016

 

Opposing GHG emissions standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Actively opposing Methane emission standards (E&PMag, March 2017)

Extract from Source:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on March 2 said it withdrew a mandate that required oil and gas companies to report their methane emissions. The directive was issued in 2016 to help the EPA determine how to best reduce methane and other emissions from existing sources. [...] The law, which took effect in January, requires operators to take various actions to reduce waste of gas such as limiting routine flaring [...]The House voted in February to repeal the rule, but the resolution is still awaiting action by the Senate. The Colorado Petroleum Council (CPC), a division of the American Petroleum Institute, has urged the Senate to “follow the House’s lead.”“The added cost of complying with this redundant, flawed and unnecessary rule could result in as many as 40% of federal wells that flare being permanently shut-in–as they would become uneconomical to produce,” Tracee Bentley, executive director for the CPC, said in a Feb. 23 media call.

Created: 13/03/2017 Last edited: 13/03/2017

 

Opposing GHG emissions standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Taking legal action against emissions standards in the US (Alaska Dispatch News, July 2017)

Extract from Source:

An appeals court Monday struck down the Environmental Protection Agency's 90-day suspension of new emission standards on oil and gas wells, a decision that could set back the Trump administration's broad legal strategy for rolling back Obama-era rules. In a 2-to-1 ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit concluded that the EPA had the right to reconsider a 2016 rule limiting methane and smog-forming pollutants emitted by oil and gas wells but could not delay the effective date while it sought to rewrite the regulation. [...] The EPA, along with the American Petroleum Institute, had argued that the stay Pruitt imposed last month was not subject to judicial review, because it did not constitute final action on the rule. [...] Reid Porter, a spokesman for the American Petroleum Institute, said in an email that the suspension of the rule would have allowed for "regulatory certainty" and that an EPA report in March concluded that methane emissions from petroleum production had already declined roughly 8 percent from 2014 levels. "API supports revision of the 2016 New Source Performance Standards, and we are hopeful that the eventual outcome recognizes the science, allowing for revisions to the flawed rule," Porter said.

Created: 21/07/2017 Last edited: 21/07/2017

 

Opposing GHG emission standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing direct regulation on methane (AXIOS, October 2017)

Extract from Source:

The Trump administration is fumbling its attempts to repeal President Obama's methane emissions limits. The oil and natural gas industry is, in turn, scrambling to respond to the resulting regulatory vacuum. The sector's main trade group is working to create a voluntary program aimed at addressing the issue, according to multiple executives in the oil industry whose companies are members of the group, the American Petroleum Institute. [...] The lowest common denominator is prevailing. The American Petroleum Institute opposes a direct regulation on methane and instead is arguing that methane emissions can be lowered as a byproduct of another EPA regulation on the books since 2012, which limits other types of air pollution at oil and gas wells, according to Kyle Isakower, vice president for Regulatory and Economic Policy at API. Many companies want more, and some even want a direct regulation of methane on new and existing sources. But the companies that want less regulation want it more than the companies that want more regulation.

Created: 03/11/2017 Last edited: 03/11/2017

 

Opposing GHG emission standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting attempts to block US methane emissions regulation (EDF, November 2017)

Extract from Source:

 After being rebuked in court, the Environmental Protection Agency took another step Wednesday in its effort to suspend commonsense rules designed to reduce harmful methane emissions from oil and gas operations. Administrator Pruitt has proposed suspending the standards for two years and today issued a Notice of Data Availability in an effort to support that flawed and damaging proposal. EPA is now seeking to justify its action based on legal theories put forward by the American Petroleum Institute.

Created: 14/11/2017 Last edited: 17/11/2017

 

Not supporting GHG emission standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting roll back of technical requirments under EPA methane regulations (The Regulatory Review, October 2018)

Extract from Source:

U.S. oil and natural gas companies emit significant amounts of methane, “a potent greenhouse gas” that the Obama Administration sought to regulate in 2016. Fewer than two years into his presidency, however, President Donald J. Trump—who applauded the energy industry for surviving the last “eight years of hell”—has overseen a comprehensive about-face by federal environmental regulators. [...]   The American Petroleum Institute (API) likewise applauded the proposal, suggesting that “the proposed changes could ensure that the rule is based on best engineering practices and cost-effective.” API writer Mark Green rejected claims by media outlets that the proposed rule would facilitate releasing methane into the atmosphere and that it represents a broader assault on environmental regulations. Rather, Green argues that because methane is a key ingredient in the production of natural gas, energy companies are already highly motivated to prevent as much of it from escaping as possible—in other words, lost methane translates into lost earnings

Created: 16/01/2019 Last edited: 08/03/2019

 

Opposing GHG emissions standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Actively opposing GHG emissions standards (NGI Daily Gas Price Index, May 2016)

Extract from Source:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued three final rules governing emissions from new oil and gas wells on Thursday. It also began the process for regulating emissions from existing oil and gas sources. The three rules, collectively updates to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), are designed to reduce methane, volatile organic compounds (VOC) and toxic air pollutants [...] Kyle Isakower, vice president for regulatory and economic policy at the American Petroleum Institute, said the EPA's final rule could put the brakes on the nation's shale energy revolution. "It doesn't make sense that the administration would add unreasonable and overly burdensome regulations when the industry is already leading the way in reducing emissions," Isakower said. "Imposing a one-size-fits-all scheme on the industry could actually stifle innovation and discourage investments in new technologies that could serve to further reduce emissions. "Natural gas is a proven source of clean, affordable, and reliable energy. The development and use of natural gas from shale has helped the U.S. lead the world in cutting power sector carbon emissions, which are near 20-year lows. The last thing we need is more duplicative and costly regulation that could discourage natural gas production, disrupts our progress reducing emissions, and increases the cost of energy for American consumers."

Created: 02/06/2016 Last edited: 17/11/2017

 

Opposing GHG emissions standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Advocating for policy makers to oppose specific GHG emissions standards (Globe and Mail, January 2017)

Extract from Source:

The top oil lobbyist in Washington, the American Petroleum Institute’s Jack Gerard, last week urged the incoming administration to reverse course on methane emissions.“The methane regulations were clearly one of the accomplishments of the Obama administration; unpacking that will be high up the list for the Trump administration,” said Alan Ross, an energy lawyer and managing partner for the Calgary office of Borden Ladner Gervais LLP. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau signed an agreement with President Barack Obama last March during a visit to Washington in which both governments vowed to reduce methane emissions from the oil industry by up to 45 per cent by 2025, as part of a broader effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and meet climate targets set out in the 2015 Paris accord. Mexico joined that agreement at a trilateral summit in June.

Created: 27/01/2017 Last edited: 17/11/2017

 

Opposing GHG emissions standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing methane emission standards (Bloomberg, May 2017)

Extract from Source:

The rule, finalized by the Obama administration in November, requires oil and gas companies to plug accidental leaks of methane, the primary component of natural gas, and scale back the practice of intentionally venting or burning the gas as they extract more profitable crude oil. It is estimated to cost companies such as EOG Resources Inc., XTO Energy Inc. and other producers on federal lands $279 million annually. [...] The American Petroleum Institute, which criticizes the rule as "technically flawed" and overlapping with existing state regulations, said it would push for the administrative changes. “While it is disappointing that the Senate did not act to correct the rule more quickly, we look forward to working with the administration on policies that continue our commitment to safely produce the energy that Americans rely on," Erik Milito, an API group director, said in an emailed statement.

Created: 12/05/2017 Last edited: 12/05/2017

 

Opposing GHG emissions standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Directly advocating to policymakers to oppose methane standards in the US (E&E News, August 2017)

Extract from Source:

The Trump administration must enforce Obama-era restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas industry — at least for now. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit last night issued a mandate striking down U.S. EPA's attempt to pause methane restrictions for the sector. The agency's 90-day stay of key provisions of New Source Performance Standards is now formally vacated, and the rule is in effect. [...] The legal back-and-forth means continued uncertainty for the oil and gas industry, which for months has aggressively lobbied EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to scrap the standards, which are designed to reduce methane leaks from wells and other infrastructure. The American Petroleum Institute and other critics have argued that Obama's EPA ignored voluntary efforts oil and gas operators were taking to slash emissions. "API continues to support an extension of the compliance deadlines, as a stay or extension is appropriate to allow EPA time to review and, as necessary, revise the 2016 EPA final rulemaking," Howard Feldman, API's senior director for regulatory and scientific affairs, said in a statement last night. Feldman added that EPA's separate, ongoing consideration of a two-year stay of the methane standards will avoid "subject[ing] businesses to on-again, off-again, requirements until EPA can reconsider the rule."

Created: 01/08/2017 Last edited: 01/08/2017

 

Opposing GHG emission standards

InfluenceMap Comment:

Sucessfully campaigned to block methane emissions regulation (Reuters, November 2017)

Extract from Source:

The administration also side-stepped the process to repeal regulations by implementing delays and holds on rules. For instance, in the final months of the Obama administration the Bureau of Land Management created a rule governing methane and waste prevention over the strong objections of groups representing oil and gas companies. API wrote to Ryan Zinke, Trump’s secretary of the interior, in May asking him to postpone implementation of the rule. The Trump administration announced it would and even cited the lobbyists’ objections as the reason.

Created: 03/11/2017 Last edited: 14/11/2017

 

No supporting methane regulation

InfluenceMap Comment:

Stressing voluntary reductions whilst supporting the efforts 'streamline' the ruels(November 2018)

Extract from Source:

Dozens of people who live near oil and gas wells pleaded with the Trump administration Wednesday not to roll back rules for methane pollution, while industry representatives said the changes should go further.  […] Matthew Todd of the American Petroleum Institute said the industry is already voluntarily reducing methane emissions even while natural gas production is increasing. “We fully expect that progress will continue,” he said. Todd said the EPA should do more to allow technological innovation and streamline the rules.

Created: 16/01/2019 Last edited: 21/03/2019

 

Opposing the direct regulation of methane

InfluenceMap Comment:

The API is opposing the direct regultion of methane wilst promoting a volunatry program (Axios, October 2017)

Extract from Source:

The American Petroleum Institute opposes a direct regulation on methane and instead is arguing that methane emissions can be lowered as a byproduct of another EPA regulation on the books since 2012, which limits other types of air pollution at oil and gas wells, according to Kyle Isakower, vice president for Regulatory and Economic Policy at API. EPA itself also touted the methane co-benefit when it released that rule five years ago.Many companies want more, and some even want a direct regulation of methane on new and existing sources. But the companies that want less regulation want it more than the companies that want more regulation. [...] API is setting up a voluntary program made up of best practices its members could adopt to cut methane emissions, according to multiple oil executives who have been in meetings about it.

Created: 08/03/2019 Last edited: 08/03/2019