EPA approves Occidental Petroleum CO2 storage in the Basin, stock in the spotlight
ODESSA, Texas (KMID/KPEJ) – The stock of Occidental Petroleum (known as OXY) was in the spotlight Monday after securing permits from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to store carbon dioxide in underground wells 14 miles from the city of Odessa in Ector county.
This includes three wells that will store about 722,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year at a depth of about 4,400 feet. According to the EPA, Class VI injection wells store carbon dioxide (CO2) deep underground, either captured from an emissions source or the atmosphere.
In a statement from OXY, the company said 'the wells would store CO2 captured from STRATOS, which is the world's largest Direct Air Capture (DAC) facility in Ector County, Texas. Occidental has expressed intentions to build 100 DAC facilities by 2035.'
In a statement from EPA Regional Administrator Scott Mason, 'Oxy Low Carbon Ventures has demonstrated their ability and intention to operate these wells responsibly while creating jobs and supporting the Texas economy.'
Stay with ABC Big 2 news as we continue to follow the latest on this developing story. For your latest Energy Report, tune in Wednesday night's at 6pm for 'Powering the Permian' with Chris Talley.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Billion Dollar Lead Service Line Replacement Tool Featured in Leading Civic and Educational Directories
Free tool designed to help save billions in drinking water infrastructure costs earns listings in MERLOT and the Civic Tech Field Guide, signaling growing national recognition CHICAGO, June 10, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Environmental & Public Health International (EPHI), a leader in Flint Water Crisis–focused drinking water training led by the former EPA Flint Emergency Coordinator, announced today that its Lead Service Line Replacement Cost Calculator (LSLRCC) has been officially listed in MERLOT and the Civic Tech Field Guide—two of the nation's most respected directories for civic innovation and educational tools. The free browser-based tool helps utilities, municipalities, engineers, and public health professionals model and estimate the cost of lead service line replacement—a critical step in protecting public health and complying with federal regulations. Since its launch in April 2025, the calculator has been used to estimate over $3 billion in lead service line replacement costs, based on anonymized analytics data. These listings reflect growing national recognition of EPHI's broader impact—including its Flint Water Crisis: Drinking Water Training courses, which are also listed in MERLOT and the Civic Tech Field Guide—as trusted resources supporting public health and drinking water infrastructure transparency. 'Being listed in MERLOT and the Civic Tech Field Guide validates what we've known from the beginning—that this tool fills a vital gap,' said Anthony Ross, founder of EPHI and former EPA Flint Emergency Coordinator. 'It helps communities take control of their lead service line replacement planning.' The MERLOT listing affirms its instructional value in environmental science, engineering, and public health education, while the Civic Tech Field Guide placement highlights its broader role in civic technology and infrastructure transparency. With thousands of communities preparing to replace lead service lines nationwide, the need for accessible, no-cost planning tools is more urgent than ever. To support this effort, EPHI is offering sponsorship opportunities to mission-aligned public, nonprofit, and private sector organizations. Sponsorship OpportunitiesSupport the Lead Service Line Replacement Cost Calculator and help advance safe drinking water and public health. We welcome mission-aligned public agencies, nonprofits, and private sector sponsors include: Government agencies focused on health, environment, and infrastructure Nonprofits advocating for safe drinking water and stronger policies Companies in water, construction, engineering, or environmental services Sponsors receive logo placement and national recognition. Visit our Sponsorship Opportunities: Support Drinking Water Infrastructure Today page. Insights From Leadership: 'We're very encouraged by the strong early adoption and engagement with the Lead Service Line Replacement Cost Calculator. The tool is becoming an essential resource for informed planning, budgeting, and protecting public health.' — Anthony Ross, EPHI Director and Former EPA Flint Emergency Coordinator Flint Water Crisis Training UpdatesExplore our Flint Water Crisis: Drinking Water Training Course page to discover upcoming sessions covering lessons learned from the Flint Water Crisis. These trainings cover critical missteps, Flint's ongoing recovery efforts, and strategies to prevent future public health failures. Gain firsthand insights, learn from past mistakes, and equip yourself with essential tools to safeguard communities. Learn more and register for upcoming sessions. About EPHI:Environmental & Public Health International provides experience-based drinking water training shaped by the Flint Water Crisis. Our mission is to support regulators and public water systems in their efforts to safeguard public health and prevent future catastrophic drinking water failures. Learn how we're advancing the goals of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and helping to save billions in drinking water infrastructure costs more information on our terms, privacy policy, or training evaluation surveys, please contact us. You can access the original press release in the News Section of EPHI's website. CONTACT: Media Contact: Anthony Ross Environmental & Public Health International Email: Phone: 312.248.1416 Website:
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump asks appeals court to keep tariffs in place or risk 'irreparable economic and national security harms'
The Trump administration on Monday argued to an appeals court that a lower court's invalidation of the president's "Liberation Day" tariffs was "illegal" and that that reimposing a halt to those duties would risk "irreparable economic and national security harms." The administration made these statements in a document filed Monday with the US Federal Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., saying the court should keep Trump's tariffs in place while considering the president's wider legal arguments about his trade policies. The president is seeking a new legal victory after a three-judge panel at the US Court of International Trade (CIT) said in May that he lacked authority to impose his "Liberation Day" duties under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA). That decision was temporarily put on hold by the appeals court, pending further arguments. The appeals court could issue a decision at any time either keeping the tariffs in place or putting them back on hold, pending the outcome of the administration's appeal. The argument made in favor of keeping them in place is that reimposing the CIT's injunction that invalidated the tariffs would risk "irreparable economic and national security harms," according to the court document filed Monday. "The injunction unilaterally diminishes America's bargaining position during sensitive trade negotiations, encouraging other countries to hold our nation hostage," the administration said. The CIT's decision, it said, usurped political choices, putting the judiciary in a central role in managing foreign negotiations, the national economy, and national security. In addition, the administration said, it would likely prevail over the lower court's ruling on appeal because the lower court misapplied the text of the IEEPA. That court's interpretation of the law would "unnaturally cabin" the president's tariff authority, the administration said. The CIT ruled that the president lacked power under IEEPA to impose the duties, saying "any interpretation" of IEEPA "that delegates unlimited tariff authority is unconstitutional." The ruling touched on key issues in the underlying case that will likely determine the ultimate fate of the administration's tariffs. In its decision striking down many of Trump's tariffs it avoided directly applying the 'major questions doctrine,' which limits the authority of federal agencies to take action on issues of "vast economic and political significance" except where Congress has explicitly authorized the action. In 2022, the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 ruling dominated by the court's conservative majority, used the major questions doctrine to find that Biden's EPA lacked clear congressional authorization to regulate certain greenhouse gas emissions. A year later, the court held that Biden's secretary of education lacked clear authority under the HEROES Act to forgive $400 billion in student loan debt. Like the EPA case, the court said Biden's debt relief regulation was so major that it would need explicit authorization from Congress. Alexis Keenan is a legal reporter for Yahoo Finance. Follow Alexis on X @alexiskweed. Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest stock market news and events moving stock prices Sign in to access your portfolio
E&E News
4 hours ago
- E&E News
White House looks to freeze more agency funds — and expand executive power
The Trump administration is working on a new effort to both weaken Congress' grip on the federal budget and freeze billions of dollars in spending at several government agencies. The architect behind the move is Russ Vought, who leads the Office of Management and Budget at the White House. Vought has long lamented the limits placed on the president's ability to direct federal spending. His latest gambit — which has not been reported previously — appears designed to test those boundaries. His office late last week directed several agencies, including EPA, the Interior and Health and Human Services departments as well as the National Science Foundation, to freeze upward of $30 billion in spending on a broad array of programs, according to both agency emails and two people familiar with the plan. Advertisement POLITICO's E&E News granted anonymity to the two people so they could speak freely without fear of reprisal from the Trump administration. OMB's targets include NSF research and education programs that operate using funding leftover from 2024. Also on the list are tens of millions of dollars for national park operations as well as more than $100 million in science spending at NASA, which includes climate research. While the president has some measure of control over how federal agencies spend their money, the 'power of the purse' lies primarily with Congress under the U.S. Constitution. Put another way: Lawmakers set the budget. Vought is trying to turn that principle on its head. The order to freeze some funding at more than a dozen agencies comes in advance of a budget spending deferrals package the White House plans to send Congress. Spending deferrals allow the executive branch to temporarily prevent authorized dollars from going out the door — but only if lawmakers sign off on the move. The deferrals strategy seems to fly in the face of Congress' constitutional power of the purse and the Impoundment Control Act, said Joseph Carlile, former associate director at OMB in the Biden administration. 'There is a right, a legal way, for the administration to rescind things and I guess they're pursuing this because they don't have their stuff together or don't care about the law,' said Carlile, who also worked previously on budgetary oversight on the House Appropriations Committee for 13 years. 'This is consistent with an administration that believes that they have broader powers around budget and spending than any other administration has ever been able to find,' Carlile added. White House officials did not deny the new strategy when asked about it. Rather, it was described as a way to lock in spending cuts prescribed by the Department of Government Efficiency, a cost-cutting outfit championed by Trump donor and entrepreneur Elon Musk. Yet the White House has worked to keep the effort quiet. The White House directive was communicated largely to agencies over the phone to avoid creating a paper trail, said one administration source with direct knowledge of the effort. OMB officials are preparing a unique strategy to weaken congressional budget authority under a Nixon-era law that limits the president's ability to block spending for political reasons. Vought has said repeatedly he does not agree with the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which Democrats and legal scholars have said he already has violated. 'We're not in love with the law,' Vought told CNN recently. The White House already has sent to Congress a $9.4 billion rescissions package to permanently cut funding for NPR and PBS as well as foreign aid. Vought has said he expects to send more rescissions packages to Congress. Vought's multipronged strategy also is likely to include a 'pocket rescissions' strategy, by which the White House intentionally runs out the clock near the end of the fiscal year. If a package is introduced then, Congress has a very limited time to act — and if it does not do so — the funds slated for elimination are automatically canceled. The White House may use the pocket rescissions strategy if the $9.4 billion rescissions package does not pass Congress, the official said. And it could pursue another pocket rescissions strategy centered around Labor Department spending, The deferrals package is a third and separate strategy — and it comes ahead of an expected congressional fight on lifting the debt ceiling before the end of the summer. It would essentially pause or significantly slow funding intentionally, until it can be crafted into a separate pocket rescissions package that can run down the clock and be made permanent. Under the impoundment law, the White House can ask Congress to defer some of its budget spending authority 'to provide for contingencies' or 'to achieve savings' through efficiency gains. The White House is planning to argue that hitting the debt ceiling — a borrowing limit imposed and periodically raised by Congress — is such a contingency. The nation is expected to reach the debt ceiling by the end of August. The White House strategy is to delay or block funds now, then craft an additional rescissions package later in the year that would make such cuts permanent. 'OMB is hard at work making the DOGE cuts permanent using a wide range of tools we have at our disposal under the ICA [Impoundment Control Act] and within the President's authority— just like the first rescissions package that was sent up to the Hill this week,' OMB spokesperson Rachel Cauley said in a statement. 'As a part of that process, we are constantly checking in with agencies to assess their unobligated balances.' Fight could land at Supreme Court The latest effort may be more comprehensive than other blocks on federal funding that Vought has enacted, according to the source with direct knowledge of the move. It could also be a 'trial balloon' to see whether the White House can unilaterally block future spending if Trump administration officials have an objection, said another source at an impacted agency. The move appears to be a significant escalation of Vought's efforts to test the boundaries of the Impoundment Control Act. Vought's strategy is to rely on Section 1013 of the act, which grants the president the authority to freeze spending if the administration explains its actions to lawmakers. The act originally allowed one chamber of Congress to reject presidential deferrals, a power that courts rejected. As a result, the law was amended in 1987 to limit how long presidents could delay spending and under what conditions. 'It does not appear that any measures to disapprove a deferral have been considered since these amendments were made,' the Congressional Research Service said in a February report on the impoundment law. Vought has long argued that impounding some congressionally appropriated funding is constitutional, and he has said he wants the Supreme Court to validate what would be a significant weakening of congressional oversight of the federal budget. The deferrals package the White House plans to send Congress would temporarily stop agencies from spending unobligated funds that remain at the end of the government's fiscal year on Sept. 30. The broad-based deferrals package is highly unusual and could be part of his strategy to take his fight for greater executive power to the Supreme Court, said Philip Joyce, a professor at the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy and author of 'The Congressional Budget Office: Honest Numbers, Power, and Policymaking.' 'It is a novel approach, but I think in the end, they really want this to go to the Supreme Court,' Joyce said. 'They think they know how the Supreme Court is going to rule and once the Supreme Court opens the door, you know, it's kind of high noon for the separation of powers, which is what they want.' Last week, OMB officials reached out to federal agencies to tell them to enact the spending freeze. Some agency officials were 'shocked' at the move, according to the administration source with direct knowledge of the plan. The head of the National Science Foundation's budget office didn't know what to make of the directive, according to an email obtained by E&E News. OMB is targeting the agency's research and education 'accounts for a deferral package,' NSF budget director Caitlyn Fife wrote Friday in a note to top officials. 'I imagine you will all have questions, as do we,' she said. 'However we are immediately focused on pulling the funds back to ensure there are no further commitments or obligations.' An NSF official briefed on the spending freeze said that offices that were relying on previous year funding could see their 'programs gutted.' The agency source also predicted that, if OMB's ploy succeeds, it will use deferrals to impound any congressionally directed spending the administration opposes. That means the deferrals package strategy is likely the start of a significant and questionable push to expand executive power, said Carlile, the former OMB associate director. The White House is essentially seeking to subvert the Constitution, which grants Congress spending authority, in such an extreme way that it threatens the nation's democratic structure, he said. 'I think it upends a fundamental check and balance contemplated in our Constitution and I don't understand how you subordinate Congress' power of the purse,' Carlile said. 'This is a deal between the executive and the legislative branch as institutions, and this all starts to unravel real quick if our budgetary framework really actually meant nothing.'
