CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) 鈥 Putting carbon dioxide from power plants and industrial facilities underground where it won鈥檛 contribute to global warming could see less federal support and enthusiasm under President Donald Trump. But experts and industry advocates doubt demand for the technology will go away as long as utilities face state-level climate change goals.
Trump has vowed to 鈥渄rill, baby, drill鈥 for fossil fuels and ordered the U.S. to withdraw from the landmark Paris agreement to try to limit Earth's warming. Meanwhile, his new energy secretary, Chris Wright, has vowed to prioritize 鈥渁ffordable, reliable and secure energy鈥 in a policy-setting order that criticizes zero-carbon goals and makes no mention of carbon capture.
Carbon capture's doubters include both conservative policy organizations and environmental groups . Even so, its outlook in the U.S. isn't all bleak.
Carbon capture got a $12 billion boost under Joe Biden through increased tax incentives and funding through the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. With projects scattered nationwide, including dozens in Republican states, there may be less appetite to include them in budget cuts, said analyst Rohan Dighe with the energy and resources research firm Wood Mackenzie.
But a broader trend away from 鈥渆nvironmental, social and governance鈥 investing, or ESG, could sap momentum for carbon capture, Dighe said by email.
鈥淪o even absent government rollback of funding, we could see fewer project announcements and movements due to lower interest in decarbonizing,鈥 Dighe wrote.
Carbon capture involves separating carbon dioxide from the emissions of power plants and other industrial facilities and pumping it underground. The goal can be either to store it permanently so it doesn't contribute to climate change, or to pressurize an oilfield to help increase production.
Carbon capture has deep support in Republican Wyoming, home to projects including an ExxonMobil plant that separates CO2 from sour gas wells for use in aging oilfields and another
In 2021, GOP Gov. Mark Gordon pledged to make the sparsely populated state 鈥 which exports 12 times more energy than it consumes 鈥
Carbon capture features prominently in that plan. In 2020, Wyoming, which contributed tens of millions of dollars for a facility at an operating power plant, became one of the first states to regulate underground carbon dioxide injection itself rather than through the EPA. That list now also includes Louisiana, North Dakota and West Virginia.
But there鈥檚 also growing skepticism in Wyoming, the nation's top coal producer. With Trump back in office, some question the need for greenhouse gas goals.
One state lawmaker recently proposed legislation titled 鈥淢ake Carbon Dioxide Great Again鈥 that would back off carbon capture including a 2020 state law requiring utilities to study how much it would cost to install at the state's fossil-fuel-fired power plants.
No other lawmakers supported the bill and it failed.
Meanwhile, Gordon is sticking with carbon capture to help protect Wyoming's coal industry. Eighteen states that account for almost two-thirds of Wyoming's coal market have renewable energy and carbon-neutrality goals, Gordon spokesman Michael Pearlman said by email.
"To keep that market, we have to use carbon capture," Pearlman wrote.
The billions of dollars in federal grants for carbon capture approved under Biden have aided dozens of carbon capture projections nationwide through the Seven are in Wyoming.
The future of the 鈥45Q鈥 tax credit for carbon capture projects especially worries the Carbon Capture Coalition, a group of more than 100 environmental groups, unions and companies. It recently urged Congress to uphold the credit, which was included in the Inflation Reduction Act.
To date, the Petra Nova facility outside Houston, whose CO2 is used to increase production at nearby oilfields, is the nation's only power plant that puts the greenhouse gas underground on a commercial scale. More could be coming eventually. Government support helped spur 270 carbon capture projects across the U.S. in the past few years, the coalition wrote to congressional leaders.
鈥淲e wanted to kind of put a stake in the ground,鈥 said Madelyn Morrison, the group鈥檚 government affairs director.
Republicans have voted dozens of times, unsuccessfully, to repeal portions of the Inflation Reduction Act when they held a minority in the Senate, Now that they control the Senate, House and White House, the bar to repeal is lower.
That would have support from the conservative Heritage Foundation, a longstanding opponent of carbon capture. Requiring carbon capture for coal- and gas-fired power plants would be costly just when electric vehicles are increasing energy demand, the group
Others on the right say building out the network of pipelines and injection wells necessary for carbon capture threatens to trample on private property rights.
鈥淐arbon capture and storage projects are nothing more than an opportunistic scheme to make vast sums of money from a problem that arguably does not exist,鈥 by the conservative Heartland Institute that recommended abolishing the 45Q tax credit.
Earthjustice and other environmental groups oppose carbon capture largely because they see it as dubious cover to maintain fossil fuel production.
For the Carbon Capture Coalition, the technology is a middle ground recognizing that neither carbon-free energy production nor an end to burning fossil fuels will happen overnight. Even if Trump is all in for fossil fuels, U.S. consumers and the global market will demand the technology, the group says.
鈥淚n order for these American industries to really remain competitive, not only in domestic markets, but really in the global marketplace, their businesses really depend on investing in innovative solutions like carbon management,鈥 Morrison said.
___
The Associated Press鈥 climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP鈥檚 for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at .
