Click here for audio. Click here for video

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee held a hearing to discuss carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration (CCUS) technologies. U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND), a member of the EPW Committee, introduced the first witness, Kevin Connors, the Assistant Director for Regulatory Compliance and Energy Policy at the Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC) in Grand Forks, N.D.

“I love the opportunity to highlight North Dakota’s place in the area of carbon capture utilization and storage, and there’s a lot that goes into why North Dakota has been at the forefront,” said Cramer. “One of the central reasons is the Energy and Environment Research Center. Kevin has been an invaluable asset to both my staff and me, in fact we look to EERC as a bit of an extension of our staff on all matters relating to carbon capture utilization and storage.

“From permitting to engineering to safe geologic storage and use of carbon, Kevin’s expertise is invaluable to this committee’s work,” continued Cramer. “The successful sequestration of CO2 is a matter of national concern, as is obvious today, and I am glad Kevin can tout the good work of North Dakota in this space and how other states can benefit from our state’s success in permitting Class VI wells.” 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates wells used for underground injection of carbon dioxide, known as Class VI wells. The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) prohibits underground injection of fluids without a permit, including underground injection of carbon dioxide for geologic sequestration. Under SDWA, EPA is authorized to delegate primary enforcement authority, or primacy, for underground injection control (UIC) programs to individual states. Cramer asked Connors to explain how North Dakota has become the national leader in CCUS technology and lessons learned from the state obtaining Class VI primacy.

“Mr. Connors, how was it that North Dakota was first?” asked Cramer. “Now we have a long history, as you've just pointed out, we've been piping and utilizing utilizing CO2 for 25 years in North Dakota. We were doing it way before it was cool. Other than that, what is it that put North Dakota at the front? How did we do it so quickly and what lessons can be learned in terms of getting that Class VI primacy authority?”

Connors explained North Dakota recognized early that the state’s economic pillars are its agriculture and energy industries.

“North Dakota took the approach of developing a resource management framework, so CO2 storage in North Dakota is regulated much like we regulate oil and gas,” responded Connors. “It's in the public interest to promote geologic storage of carbon dioxide. We declared CO2 is a valuable commodity for its industrial use, specifically for enhanced oil recovery. And we regulate the pore space in North Dakota, like a resource under a resource management framework. That gives the state the ability to create unitization or unitize these projects in order to allow landowners to monetize their resource or monetize their pore space when looking to maximize the use of that pore space. So all nine projects that have been approved in North Dakota have units that have been established by the state regulatory authority.”

Cramer followed up by asking about the challenges surrounding Class VI wells and aquifer exemptions. The EPA sets standards for drinking water quality through the SDWA including establishing minimum standards for state programs to protect underground sources of drinking water from endangerment by underground injection of fluids. Exemptions are granted if it can be demonstrated that the proposed aquifer is not a current underground source of drinking water (USDW), nor will it become one in the future. However, existing regulations do not allow new aquifer exemptions to be issued for UIC Class VI injection even though the same aquifer may be used for other discharges.

“Mr. Connors,  in your testimony you referenced something that's intriguing to me, and that is the aquifer exemption issue,” said Cramer. “Can you walk through that a little bit with me? First of all, what are the dangers? And second of all, why do you need the exemption? If we don't get the exemption, how does that affect the availability of space for storage?”

“So it's a complex challenge, but EPA created a process to allow for the exclusion of those formations to be able to use them for underground injection,” answered Connors. “When EPA published the Class VI rule in 2010, they excluded aquifer exemptions as not allowed for Class VI injection. So all the other well class classes are allowed to have or apply for aquifer exemptions other than Class VI. What that means to this committee is there are formations that are ideal and suitable for CO2 storage that will never be used for drinking water, yet you cannot permit or inject into those formations because of the current regulations.”

Connors explained the actions which need to be taken to amend the regulations, including a three-prong solution.

“Congress can address it and direct EPA to amend their rules and allow for aquifer exemptions for Class VI,” continued Connors. “EPA will have to amend their rules and remove that provision. The third piece is also challenging EPA as the final authority when it comes to making that decision for aquifer exemptions and that still takes a long lead time. I previously administered North Dakota's Class II UIC program, and it would take a year or two years to get an aquifer for exemption from the EPA when they do allow it for that injectionable class.”

Cramer closed his questioning by asking about the difference between viewing CO2 as a pollutant and a commodity, as well as utilization of captured CO2.

“Enhanced oil recovery is when you inject CO2 into an already existing field to push out more oil, in a world where you have stagnant or declining oil demand. Oil produced from enhanced oil recovery is the lowest carbon intensive barrel of oil that you can get out of the ground,” responded Jack Cavanaugh, of Breakthrough Energy, another witness at the hearing. “We've seen a demand for this globally, with these barrels being sold right now. I think around six percent of current U.S. production is with enhanced oil recovery. From your utilization question, I think it's a positive pathway.”

Cramer concluded by highlighting the net-negative oil being produced in southwestern North Dakota.