Connect with us

New Mexico

New Mexico’s Deal With Oil Company to Plug Wells Could Set a Precedent

Published

on

New Mexico’s Deal With Oil Company to Plug Wells Could Set a Precedent


Welcome to “Feet to the Fire: Big Oil and the Climate Crisis,” a biweekly newsletter in which we share our latest reporting on how the fossil fuel industry is driving climate change and influencing climate policy in five of the nation’s most important oil- and gas-producing states. In addition, we shine a spotlight on the financing of the fossil fuel industry, holding banks and other financial institutions accountable for their role and providing you with updates on their activities.

Click here to subscribe to the newsletter in Substack. 


New Mexico to Bankroll Plugging of Oil Wells for Company Dubbed ‘Poster Child’ for State Reforms

In an unprecedented settlement, the state of New Mexico came to an agreement with Ridgeway Arizona Oil Corp. to plug 299 of the company’s moribund, nonproducing oil wells, with the state paying the costs and the company reimbursing the state $30,000 per month until the bill is repaid. The repayment process could take more than 83 years. The company was the focus of a Capital & Main investigation last year into companies taking advantage of a state program allowing oil and gas producers to temporarily shut off wells due to the collapse of the fossil fuel market following global COVID-19 economic shutdowns. Instead of forcing companies to produce oil and gas at a loss during the pandemic — which would have the side effect of lowering state tax revenue — the Oil Conservation Division implemented an emergency rule allowing companies to shut down wells for up to three years without penalty.

Advertisement

Why Pittsburgh’s ‘Extreme Embrace’ of Fossil Fuel Lobbyists Threatens to Undermine Local Climate Goals

More than Houston or Baton Rouge or other cities where the oil industry dominates the economy, Pittsburgh is entangled in “the most extreme embrace” of fossil fuel lobbyists, according to a report from environmental research and advocacy organization F Minus. The report identified five powerful lobbying firms that represent oil and gas companies, as well as environmentally minded groups and city government — a dual loyalty that threatens to undermine local climate goals and the state’s progress on its greenhouse gas reduction goals, reports The Slick’s Audrey Carleton. “Fossil fuel companies have far more money and clout and gravity and so the magnets are always going to move in their direction,” said report author James Browning.

U.S. Banks Lag European Banks in Green Financing

American banks lag European banks when it comes to green financing — loans and bonds for environmentally friendly industries — largely due to a politically fueled backlash in some states against investment policies by some banks suspected favor renewables over fossil fuels. Overall the world’s largest banks made $3 billion from underwriting bonds and making loans in the sustainable category last year compared to $2.7 billion for the oil and gas industry. The backlash began in 2022 when the state of Texas accused BlackRock and nine European investment banks of boycotting the oil and gas industry. In response, BlackRock assured the state that it had $310 billion worth of investments in the oil and gas industry. Either way, the momentum is not quite there yet — four times as much capital (investments, loans, bonds, etc.) needs to be allocated to green projects compared to fossil fuels by 2030 to align with net zero emissions targets, according to an analysis by BloombergNEF. Yet at the end of 2022, that ratio was just 0.7 to 1, largely unchanged from the previous year. “Banks still aren’t keeping pace with the rate of transition that’s required to avoid catastrophic climate change,” Jason Schwartz, senior communications strategist at Sunrise Project, a nonprofit focused on the financial sector’s contribution to global warming, told BloombergBNN.

Advertisement

Canada’s Big Banks Accused of Misleading Investors When It Comes to ‘Sustainable Finance’

Canada’s big five banks were accused of misleading investors by using terms such as  “sustainable finance” without supporting their claims with actual data, according to climate advocacy group Paris Compliance, which filed a complaint with securities regulators last  week. The banks — RBC, TD, BMO, CIBC and Scotiabank — have made pledges on sustainable finance totalling $2 trillion by 2030. “They’re putting this in the window as one of their core responses to climate change and net zero, when they’re not rationalizing or justifying or providing any evidence or proof about that,” Matt Price, executive director of the group, told the CBC. As an example, Paris Compliance noted that TD Bank served as a co-sustainability structuring agent for a U.S. $4 billion sustainability-linked loan with Occidental Petroleum, an oil company which is spending $12 billion to buy shale driller CrownRock. The banks did not respond to the CBC’s requests for comment.

ING is First Major Bank to End Financing for Blast Furnace Steel Projects

Global banking giant ING took a big step recently as the first major bank to stop financing new unabated steel blast furnaces, new metallurgical coal mines or the expansion of such existing furnaces and mines. The steel sector has long been in the crosshairs of climate activists since it is one of the biggest industrial sources of CO2 emissions. The news was welcomed by environmental groups such as BankTrack, which urged ING to go further by ending “corporate finance and bond facilitation services for companies developing steel infrastructure that depends on metallurgical coal, and companies that have metallurgical coal mining expansion plans.”

Giant Banks Behind Merger that Created the Country’s Largest Natural Gas Producer

Advertisement

Chesapeake Energy and Southwestern Energy merged last week in an agreement valued at $7.4 billion or $6.69 per share — creating one of the country’s largest natural gas producers. The deal will almost certainly face scrutiny as mergers and acquisitions  continue in the energy industry. The giant, which will soon have a new name, aims to expand production and gain “access to premium markets to supply growing global natural gas demand.” Major financial institutions involved in the deal include lead financial adviser Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Securities LLC as financial adviser — though both banks have made commitments to help transition their financing from fossil fuels to renewables in the coming decades.


Copyright 2023 Capital & Main



Source link

Advertisement

New Mexico

Future of free childcare for all families in New Mexico remains uncertain

Published

on

Future of free childcare for all families in New Mexico remains uncertain


Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham has no regrets about universal childcare.

As she approaches the end of her second term in New Mexico’s top office, she acknowledges there are some things she would have done differently. In a recent interview, she called 20/20 hindsight a “very powerful tool” that not enough politicians put to good use.

Moving the state toward a free childcare system — open to all New Mexico families regardless of income — isn’t on that list, however. The issue has turned into one of the defining public policy issues of Lujan Grisham’s tenure — which will come to an end later this year. The state’s heavily Democratic Legislature, initially wary of the program, has since voiced support and created a funding stream to continue the initiative for the next five years.

Advertisement

‘You have to start there’

Childcare costs, benefits

Advertisement

‘We have to get it right’

GOP might ‘peel back’ scope

Advertisement



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

New Mexico

Opinion: Applauding Heinrich for bi-partisan permitting reform work – New Mexico Political Report

Published

on

Opinion: Applauding Heinrich for bi-partisan permitting reform work – New Mexico Political Report






Opinion: Applauding Heinrich for bi-partisan permitting reform work – New Mexico Political Report












Advertisement



Advertisement





Skip to content

Advertisement


Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

New Mexico

New Mexico lawmakers, leaders respond to federal lawsuit

Published

on

New Mexico lawmakers, leaders respond to federal lawsuit


ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — State lawmakers and leaders released the following statements in response to the federal lawsuit against New Mexico and the City of Albuquerque.

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez

“House Bill 9 is a constitutional exercise of state authority, and this office will defend it.  

The New Mexico Legislature passed this law after extensive consideration of documented harms occurring in immigration detention facilities operating in this state — inadequate medical care, deaths in custody, and conditions that fell well below acceptable standards. The Legislature made a considered judgment that New Mexico’s government, its employees, and its publicly funded facilities should not be instruments of a detention system that has caused serious and preventable harm to people held within our borders. That is precisely the kind of policy judgment that belongs to the states.  

Advertisement

The Constitution reserves to the states the power to govern their own affairs — including how state and local personnel are deployed and how publicly funded facilities are used. Federal agents remain free to enforce federal immigration law. They may make arrests, conduct investigations, and carry out removals. What they may not do is compel New Mexico’s officers, employees, and institutions to administer federal enforcement priorities the state has chosen not to adopt. The federal government has its own personnel and its own resources. It does not have a constitutional right to New Mexico’s.  

This lawsuit asks a federal court to override a democratically enacted state law because the administration disagrees with the policy choice the Legislature made. That is not a constitutional argument. It is an attempt to use federal litigation to reverse an outcome the administration dislikes. We will see them in court.” 

Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller

“I will always stand up for the safety, rights, and dignity of Albuquerque residents. Our policies ensure ALL families can call 911, send their kids to school, and access City services without fear, while making clear that City resources are not tools for federal immigration raids. We are ready to defend our community, our values, and our public safety in court,”

City Councilor Dan Lewis

Advertisement

“Mayor Keller deserves to be sued for his reckless promotion of dangerous sanctuary policies that undermine cooperation between law enforcement agencies and put everyone at risk. Sanctuary laws don’t protect; they create more victims. I opposed Keller’s so-called ‘Safer Community Places’ ordinance from the beginning. It’s nothing more than obstruction of law enforcement and this mayor chose his radical ideology over public safety. Most people in our City agree that there is a public safety benefit when local, state and federal law enforcement work together to enforce the law and protect innocent people.”

Deb Haaland

“As ICE continues threatening communities across the country, the state is the first line of defense against the Trump administration. In New Mexico, we are lucky that the state and localities worked to lawfully pass legislation to protect New Mexicans and their families from ICE. We can’t let the federal government continue to exert their will on New Mexico and we won’t let them intimidate us. We are a multicultural state, we must stand strong with our neighbors. That means as governor, I will do anything in my power to stop ICE from tearing families apart and committing crimes in our streets while advocating for strong, common sense immigration and border security reform.”

The Democratic Party of New Mexico

“The Immigrant Safety Act passed both legislative chambers and was signed into law constitutionally, within our rights as a state, concerning New Mexico’s own personnel, facilities, and resources. The Trump Administration may not like that New Mexico stands for the safety of all the families in our communities and against inhumane and dangerous conditions in for-profit detention centers, but they have to respect our rights as a state.  

Advertisement

The fact of the matter is that the Trump Administration is overstepping its authority as they continue to force a violent, clumsy immigration agenda onto communities it has terrorized across the country against their will.”   

Republican Party of New Mexico

“The lawsuit filed by the United States against the State of New Mexico, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, Attorney General Raul Torrez, the City of Albuquerque, and Mayor Timothy Keller confirms what many New Mexicans have feared for months — that House Bill 9 and Albuquerque’s Safer Community Places Ordinance were driven by partisan politics rather than the safety, stability, and economic well-being of our communities.

Legislators who pushed HB9 chose political ideology over common sense and over the people they were elected to represent. This legislation appears to have been crafted not to improve public safety or immigration outcomes, but to advance an anti-Trump political agenda at any cost. In doing so, they ignored the serious consequences these policies would have on New Mexico families, local economies, county governments, and the very immigrants they claim to protect.

The federal government’s complaint makes clear that these laws threaten decades-long partnerships between local governments and federal authorities that have been essential to maintaining public safety and enforcing immigration law. These partnerships support jobs, economic activity, and critical infrastructure in communities like Otero County, where nearly 300 jobs are now at risk because of these reckless political decisions.

Advertisement

New Mexico legislators also failed to consider the financial burden these measures place on counties and municipalities already struggling with limited resources. Instead of working collaboratively to address immigration challenges responsibly and humanely, they chose confrontation and obstruction.

Most troubling is the complete disregard for the safety of New Mexicans. Policies that intentionally interfere with federal immigration enforcement risk creating greater instability, undermining law enforcement cooperation, and putting thousands of residents at risk. At the same time, these policies do nothing to improve the care, processing, or long-term outcomes for immigrants being housed in detention and processing facilities.

The people of New Mexico deserve leadership focused on public safety, economic security, and lawful solutions — not political theater designed to score partisan points. When elected officials prioritize ideology over citizens, communities suffer. The consequences of HB9 and related sanctuary-style policies are now being challenged in federal court, and New Mexicans are left to deal with the damage caused by leaders who appeared more interested in opposing President Trump than protecting the people of this state.

And now, after advancing policies that threaten jobs, hurt counties financially, undermine law enforcement cooperation, and divide communities, these same legislators want taxpayers to pay them for their failing policies. Instead of moving New Mexico forward, too many elected officials have focused solely on advancing their own political agendas while ignoring the real needs of working families, local governments, and public safety.

This election season, New Mexicans have an opportunity to speak loudly at the polls. The primary elections matter, and voters must carefully choose strong Republican candidates willing to go to Santa Fe and fight against harmful policies that put politics above people. New Mexico deserves leaders who will protect communities, strengthen the economy, support law enforcement, and put citizens first — not politicians who continue to gamble with the future of this state.”

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending