Latest news with #HouseCommitteeonNaturalResources
Axios
20-05-2025
- Business
- Axios
Proposed federal land sale stokes concerns over Utah water pipeline
A proposed sale of federal land to local governments in Utah is raising concerns that it could help pave the way for a controversial water pipeline from Lake Powell. The big picture: The Lake Powell Pipeline is a proposed 143-mile duct that would transport 86,000 acre-feet of water annually from the lake into southwestern Utah. Water officials from Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Wyoming — the six states that share the Colorado River basin with Utah — asked U.S. Interior Secretary David Bernhardt in 2020 to halt an environmental impact statement for the pipeline until "substantive legal and operational issues" were resolved. The project has largely been on hold for the past several years. Driving the news: In the House Committee on Natural Resources on May 6, a late-night amendment to President Trump's " big, beautiful bill" by U.S. Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Nevada) included provisions to transfer federal land to Washington County in southwestern Utah, the Washington County Water Conservation District and the city of St. George. The intrigue: An analysis that the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) provided to U.S. Rep. Greg Stanton's office called the amendment "a direct threat to Arizona's water future." The analysis said the land sale that aligns with the pipeline's path would have "serious implications" for ongoing Colorado River negotiations, would weaken Arizona's negotiating position and would risk "an escalation of unilateral actions by other states, further destabilizing river governance." ADWR told Axios it contributed to the analysis, but it's unclear who else was involved or which details came from the agency. Between the lines: Maps obtained by Axios that the Bureau of Land Management prepared for U.S. Rep. Celeste Maloy (R-Utah), who introduced the amendment with Amodei, show that a small stretch of land running parallel to the Arizona state line, and another spur that juts off to the north, largely mirrors a segment of the pipeline route. A portion would also run through a block of land that would go to the water district. Yes, but: The overwhelming majority of the pathway is outside the federal land from the amendment, including lengthy segments in Coconino and Mohave counties in Arizona and Utah's Kane County. What they're saying: Stanton and U.S. Rep. Susie Lee (D-Nevada) said several of the federal parcels align with the pipeline's proposed route, and water managers in their states warned the land sale could be used to develop the project. They called on House Republicans to remove the proposed land sale from the bill, calling it a "Trojan horse to steal Nevadans' and Arizonans' water." The other side: Karry Rathje, a spokesperson for the Washington County Water Conservancy District, told Axios the land it would receive isn't related to the pipeline and wouldn't help expedite it, adding it wouldn't change the National Environmental Policy Act process required for the pipeline. The district plans to use that parcel for a potential reservoir, while the county said it intends to use the land for transportation and other infrastructure projects like enhancements to a regional water reuse system. County Commissioner Adam Snow said in a statement the amendment only authorizes the land's sale and doesn't require any purchases. The statement didn't directly mention the pipeline, but Snow said the county is open to discussions with anyone concerned about specific parcels, including about possible deed restrictions "to ensure proper use if the option to acquire was exercised." Maloy said the land is for "trails, roads, water infrastructure, a little bit for the airport," and is unrelated to the pipeline, E&E News by Politico reported last week.
Boston Globe
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
America loves its public lands so don't sell them off
Trump's views on public lands weren't always like this. In January 2016, before voters in the Republican presidential primary launched Donald Trump toward his first term, Trump and his son Donald Jr. attended the world's largest firearm trade show in Las Vegas. The pair sat for interviews and rubbed elbows at the SHOT Show with gun manufacturers, hunters, and shooting sports aficionados. Throughout the visit, the Trumps carried a strong conservation message in press conferences and interviews with the media. The future president Advertisement There is little doubt that Don Jr., an avid hunter who has long enjoyed American public land, was largely responsible for his father's take at that time. Observers, particularly hunters and anglers who identified as Republican or independent, applauded Trump's words. But when Trump was elected for his second term, a new crew was at his back and some of the same players wanting the federal government to jettison the citizens' public lands were chirping in the president's ear that public lands could be sold to pay down the national debt. Don Jr., meanwhile, has been largely silent. Americans own, use, and enjoy more than 640 million acres of land, about a third of the land mass in the nation, mostly acquired in the Louisiana Purchase. Federal agencies, from the Forest Service to the Department of Defense, manage these lands on our behalf. Mining companies, oil and gas companies, ranchers, and loggers lease the vast resources of these lands, paying back into the treasury. Hunters, anglers, hikers, off-road vehicle enthusiasts, and anyone else wanting to escape the noise of civilization can enjoy these lands, usually for free or a nominal fee. Public land provides clean air and water in an ever-changing climate. Advertisement Yet some states, led most recently by Utah, believe they should take those lands from the nation's taxpayers for their own use. Trump, in 2016, was dead right: The states have often chosen to sell off the land to private interests. Nevada once had 2.7 million acres of state land and now owns just 3,000. Oregon had 3.4 million acres and now has 776,000 acres. The notion of selling off land for housing development is one that many politicians have embraced. Republicans on the House Committee on Natural Resources recently voted to clear the path for sales of land around the Nevada cities of Las Vegas and Reno and near the fast-growing retirement community of St. George, Utah, tacked on as part of the budget reconciliation. But much of the housing shortage in the nation is found in New York and Florida, while housing shortages in Nevada, Arizona, and Utah are often tied to significant water or labor shortages. Moreover, the federal government already has the ability to sell off certain parcels of public land, taking into account public input, not a dark-of-night maneuver in Congress. The Biden administration, for instance, Moreover this sell-off philosophy of federal lands ignores the fact that public lands are vastly popular. In the early 1900s, states in the East, jealous of the vast public resource in the West, pushed for passage of the Weeks Act, which allowed the federal government to purchase thousands of acres of land from private interests from Maine to Alabama. National Forests like Pennsylvania's Allegheny and Vermont's Green Mountain were once private lands and now are enjoyed by millions of Americans. Advertisement Public lands pay. Oil and gas royalties are cheaper, mining is cheaper, grazing is cheaper. A rancher grazing a cow on public land pays less than $1.50 a month to do so. On private land, that cost can be $50 per cow. And outdoor recreation is worth $1.2 trillion. All may not be grim with Burgum and his 'balance sheet' language. During his confirmation hearing, Burgum, a sportsman, touted public lands as a miracle and channeled America's public lands hero, President Theodore Roosevelt. Yet we may be reaching a turning point for the future of our public lands. Perhaps it is time for Don Jr. to help his father make the right choice, as he did when he was just one of many candidates for the nation's highest office.
New York Post
14-05-2025
- Business
- New York Post
Drill, baby, drill — in Brooklyn: Let's tap the energy bonanza beneath our feet
The American energy sector is on the cusp of a tectonic transformation. This week, members of the House Committee on Natural Resources heard testimony on the vast potential of geothermal energy as 'a new era of American energy — built with American innovation, American technology and American workers,' as one witness put it. Chris Wright, President Donald Trump's new energy secretary, has fervently endorsed geothermal as a way to 'energize our country,' and a March study found that geothermal could meet roughly two-thirds of the voracious energy demands of AI data centers by the early 2030s. Advertisement Even right here in New York City, new residential and office developments underway in Greenpoint, Coney Island and Manhattan are being built to rely significantly on this power source. Geothermal has the potential to be the Holy Grail of energy: unlimited and right under our feet. But there's a problem. Geothermal is expensive because it's difficult to access . . . until now. Advertisement Today, American innovators are supercharging the geothermal energy revolution with directional drilling and hydraulic fracturing, the same technologies that delivered the miracle of American shale. 'This isn't a concept or a pilot, it's a full-scale energy project in motion,' Tim Latimer of Fervo Energy told the House committee Monday, as he described the 500-megawatt plant his company is building in Utah. 'We've unlocked geothermal energy in places where it was previously impossible.' Here's how it works. The interior of the Earth is an inferno of hot rock and molten metal, and heat — whether from natural gas, nuclear or something else — is what we need to spin generator turbines to create electricity. Advertisement Shallow geothermal wells for small residential systems can access sufficient heat anywhere from a couple feet to several hundred feet below ground — the city-block-long Greenpoint project, for example, will use a geo-exchange system of 300 bored holes going down nearly 500 feet. But the energy output needed for a power plant demands much deeper wells, sometimes reaching two miles below the surface. Successfully drilling that deep to access this ever-present subterranean heat source has, until now, been extremely difficult. But just like directional drilling opened up the extraction of previously unreachable oil and gas deposits in shale rock formations, the same technologies can unlock geothermal energy — and can do so almost anywhere in the country. Advertisement Drilling sideways into hot rocks far beneath the earth's surface, then injecting high-pressure fluids, creates energy that turns turbines to generate electricity and power our factories, heat our homes, turn on our lights and fuel our vehicles. And geothermal has a 90% capacity factor, meaning it can run at nearly full capacity continually without breaks, meeting round-the-clock energy demands and ensuring grid stability. New York state has made some small-scale geothermal investments, including tax credits for home geothermal systems. But it will take the power of directional drilling to scale this domestic, reliable, carbon-free energy source for broader use. If we seize the chance, the United States will dominate this massive emerging market, pioneering the geothermal tech used not only here but throughout the world. If we don't, we could lose out once again to China. Over recent decades, China has cornered the critical-mineral market — and with it, the renewable-energy technologies that depend on these resources. Advertisement Now, the United States is struggling to catch up in manufacturing products like solar panels and electric vehicles. We can't afford to stumble at the starting block when it comes to geothermal energy. If we exploit our oil and gas know-how to win the geothermal race, we can keep the world running on American tech in this vital sector — while keeping our nation from relying on the Chinese Communist Party. US-made directional drilling has done this once before. Advertisement Directional drilling drove down shale access costs enough to transform energy markets. After it began to be implemented at scale in the early 2000s, US natural-gas production more than doubled. By 2016, this approach accounted for almost 70% of all oil and natural-gas wells. Today, nobody can come close to America's shale dominance. If this method can do for geothermal what it did for shale, the costs of this energy source could plummet 80% by 2035, the International Energy Agency estimates. Advertisement Delivering geothermal at such a cost-value will make the United States the undisputed leader in the world's next big energy market — yet again. No wonder Trump called geothermal heat one of our country's 'amazing national assets' when he established his National Energy Dominance Council. Directional drilling launched the shale revolution, altering history and strengthening our nation. Advertisement It's time to unleash these same tools so America can lead the geothermal revolution, too. Neil Chatterjee served as chairman and a member of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Here's Why the Federal Land Sale Bill Is a Bad Idea, and Horrible Legislation
America's hunters and anglers are raising hell this week after a proposal to sell up to a half-million acres of BLM land in Nevada and Utah made it through the House Committee on Natural Resources. They're right to raise hell. The wealth that ordinary Americans hold in our public lands and waters is one of our country's great equalizers, putting blue-collar wage workers on the same footing — literally — with CEOs and tech bros. For hunters and anglers, these public lands and waters are our backyard, our grocery store, our library, our gym, our church, and our classroom. The most obvious reason the proposal to sell BLM land outside St. George, Utah, and in Nevada's urban-growth areas is getting heat because it creates a precedent to sell other public parcels — maybe every public parcel — without a review process. But that's only half the story. The real story is how this odious amendment to a congressional budget proposal was slipped in at the last minute, with no debate, no clear budgetary purpose, no public process, and apparently against the wishes of people who live among the public lands that will be sold. That sort of political malpractice should get the attention of every Western hunter and angler, and the committee's proceedings should be required listening for conservatives who demand fiscal responsibility, relish vigorous debate, and who oppose activist government. The idea that public land might be auctioned off to balance the federal budget had been circulated for weeks before the May 6 House Natural Resources Committee budget mark-up session. But conservationists were relieved when a draft of the budget priorities didn't include a provision for selling federal properties. There was plenty to dislike in the budget reconciliation plan, including mandatory energy leases on federal land, expansion of coal mining in the West, green-lighting a controversial mine near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and a habitat-fracturing road in Alaska, and removing environmental protections and the ability to protest wrong-headed projects. But at least there were no federal land sales in the blueprint that is estimated to either save or raise $18.5 billion, well above the committee's target of $1 billion in savings. I'll give the committee and its chairman, Arkansas Republican Bruce Westerman, this: They covered a lot of ground on May 6. For hours they waded through almost 120 amendments to the budget proposal. Most were from the minority Democrats, calling for revision or withdrawal of some of the most contentious provisions of the budget blueprint. For about 11 hours, Westerman entertained one amendment after another, though all failed on party-line votes. The day would have gone even longer, but no Republican rose to defend the blueprint or to refute Democrats' claims of self-dealing, collusion, violations of congressional order, or harms to the environment, the economy, and to communities around the country. I mean no Republican spoke up. Not one. Not even when Colorado Democrat Joe Neguse pleaded for some insight about whether a provision violated House rules that prohibit policy matters in budget bills (That question matters; it might be enough to get the entire committee blueprint rejected by the Senate parliamentarian). I mention the Republican's stonewalling, apparently in obedience to a gag order from GOP leadership, because for 11 hours, most Republicans were not even present for the mark-up, appearing only for periodic votes. The sham hearing reminded me of a politburo proceeding, a realization that would be funny if the content of the hearing wasn't so dangerous to our hunting, angling, and public-access traditions. The meeting extended well into the night, until Nevada Republican Mark Amodei, along with co-sponsor Celeste Maloy (R-Utah), dropped a 33-page amendment that calls for selling about 11,000 acres of BLM land around St. George, Utah, another 200,000 acres around Las Vegas and other Nevada cities, and would force the 'sale or exchange' of another 356,000 acres of landlocked BLM land in rural Pershing County, Nevada You can see how it all went down here, (starting at about time stamp 2:59:30 to 3:32:03). This is the trigger that has sparked outrage since the House committee approved the amendment, introduced at nearly midnight, on a 26-17 mainly party-line vote. Only California Democrat Adam Gray voted for the package, though he has indicated he won't support it on the House floor. 'This is just some truly odious sausage at 11:20 p.m. at the end of a long markup,' observed Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the committee. 'Any member of Congress that votes for this is just surrendering any semblance of good process.' I'll put a point on Huffman's comments. No member of the committee, not even Republicans, saw a map of the land sales, which are not suggested or recommended. The amendment, by using the word 'shall,' requires the federal government to execute the land sales and trades. That should get the attention of any Westerner who dislikes the idea of the government forcing its way into local real estate deals. Despite being asked repeatedly by his colleagues, Amodei could not articulate why his amendment was needed, or who had requested it. Furthermore, the amendment carries no fiscal note, since the land will be sold for fair-market value, budget drafters have no idea of the impact to the federal budget. And after committee Democrats pushed the point, Amodei acknowledged that he doesn't represent most of the Nevada committees affected by his amendment and confirmed that local officials in those regions were opposed to it. That should get the attention of home-staters who oppose the notion of an activist federal government. While the committee didn't have any maps on which to base their vote, the parcels in Utah and many of those in Nevada are identified here. And the Pershing County land exchange map is shared below. As the National Wildlife Federation has observed, the budget draft bypasses an established process of disposing of federal land that includes public input, coordination with local governments, and a transparent review process. Congress is supposed to be notified for sales exceeding 2,500 acres, and in those reviews, a formal hearing is scheduled so that proponents, opponents, and informational witnesses can provide the basis — and sworn testimony — for congressional consideration. None of that happens with Amodei's amendment. 'Rather than requiring careful analysis and local input, the amendment mandates that these lands be sold, exchanged, or transferred on an expedited timeline, essentially cutting corners on the planning, environmental review, and public participation that would normally happen under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act' of 1976, the NWF notes in a blog post. Both the local participation and environmental review should be especially critical in the Pershing County land swap. According to some accounts, proponents of the swap intend to develop metal mines on the consolidated lands. 'Solidus Resources, LLC, Coeur Mining, Pershing Gold, and EP Minerals will have the ability to purchase the federal lands where their mining claims are located,' according to Pershing County's local government. It should be noted that federal-land sale and consolidation has long had support from the county government and nearby Winnemucca. That makes sense, but what doesn't make sense is that, according to the 1872 Mining Law, mineral deposits from federal lands can be extracted without paying any royalties to the U.S. Treasury. Every time the royalty provision has been revisited, it has been voted down by Western Republicans. The consequence of the Pershing County land deal may be that once-federal lands will be sold 'at fair market value' to mining companies, with minimal contributions to the federal Treasury, and then developed with no receipts going to balance the federal budget. That should raise a red flag for every fiscal hawk in Congress. To put a point on it, this land deal does not address our federal budget deficit. The problem with short-cutting the established process is that, if the budget provision passes the full House and then the Senate, and these land sales proceed, similar sales could be done again and again. And this time, budget-drafters will likely have real revenue numbers at their disposal, from receipts generated by the sale of high-value Utah and Nevada urban-interface BLM sales. Some projections are that BLM in Clark County, Nevada, could sell for as much as $120,000 per acre to developers who, given the high cost of the land, will not be interested in building affordable housing. That revenue will look mighty good to fiscal conservatives who would use the sale of our public estate to get out of a budgetary jam. The problem with that thinking, of course, is that it's like a landlord selling a house to pay a debt. It's an immediate fix, but gone is the monthly rental payment, the appreciation of the asset over time, and the enjoyment of the house in the future. Also missing from the calculation is the recreational value that almost all public lands hold. For those of us in small Western communities, it's the ability to swing out to a section of BLM land to sight-in a deer rifle before the season, or the hole in a river where we taught our kids to fish, or the trail where we experienced the frights and joys of solitude. Or the handsome ridge where we want our ashes to be spread. If we don't fight this particular time, and stop this flawed bill and hackneyed process, how can we fight when our own backyards, churches, stores, and playgrounds are on the auction block? There's still a chance to turn this around on the demerits of this particular bill. It's big government at its worst, won't solve our budget mess, and is being jammed through by drones who wouldn't know a dry fly from a streamer. And most importantly, it's neither in the national interest or your community's interest. Tell your representative to vote against the House Natural Resources Committee reconciliation budget mark-up. Tell them it doesn't deserve to live to see the Senate. And it certainly doesn't deserve President Trump's signature.
Yahoo
13-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
The nation's geothermal potential stalls in federal bureaucracy
As the nation seeks to unleash energy production, geothermal has been a high-profile source of attention for multiple presidential administrations because it is clean and renewable, but the average American doesn't seem to know about it. Geothermal energy is a renewable resource that comes from heated rocks and liquids stored deep in the Earth. When that energy is released naturally to the earth's surface, hot springs, geysers and volcanoes form — typically near tectonic plates. Geothermal power plants generate electricity by drilling deep into the earth to access the hot solid or liquid below. If happens when solid, cold water is poured down to create steam, which rotates a turbine that then powers a generator, producing electricity. 'In the coming years, the United States will face unprecedented growth and energy demand as we race to win the AI war against China and bring gigawatts of new data center capacity online, and an all-of-the-above approach for energy development is the only option we have to move forward,' Rep. Pete Stauber, R-Minn., said Monday during a field hearing for the House Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources hosted by Utah Rep. Celeste Maloy and Southern Utah University. Geothermal power, he said, will help meet those needs. The U.S. Department of Energy predicts that human-made geothermal energy, or enhanced geothermal systems, could ultimately power over 65 million homes and businesses in the states, and will be 'the next frontier for renewable energy deployment.' It is arguably the least polarizing renewable energy option across political party lines as it is viewed as one of the most practical solutions to the United States' energy demand, and Utah is considered a hotbed of geothermal opportunity. Utah is third in the nation for its production of utility-scale electricity derived from geothermal energy, behind California at No. 1 and Nevada, which takes second place. The only issue: The best places to build power plants are on federally owned land. 'Even when the geology is ideal, it can take years to get a green light to drill. In states like Utah, where so much promising geothermal potential lies beneath federally managed lands, the permitting backlog is especially problematic,' Maloy said Monday. She and two of her Republican colleagues, Stauber and Rep. Nicholas Begich, R-Alaska, held the field hearing, 'Letting Off Steam: Unleashing Geothermal Energy Development on Federal Land,' discussing with energy developers and experts the barriers to developing geothermal energy on federally owned land. Getting land permits for energy purposes from the Bureau of Land Management is not a new process. In fact, geothermal energy was the first type of renewable energy that the BLM approved for production on public lands in 1978. The issue is timing. 'We need smart federal policy,' Tim Latimer, CEO of Fervo Energy and witness during Monday's hearing, said. 'Today, 90% of geothermal resources lie on federally managed land, but permitting can take up to a decade, much longer than equivalent wind, solar, oil and gas projects. That needs to change.' Federal permits can take upward of 10 years to be granted, and that doesn't include litigation, Stauber warned. That's why bipartisan bills like Sen. Mike Lee's co-led Geothermal Energy Optimization (GEO) Act and Utah Sen. John Curtis' Geothermal Energy Opportunity (GEO) Act (same name different legislation) or Maloy's Full Responsibility and Expedited Enforcement (FREE) Act have been pushed at the federal level to 'streamline the federal permitting process' and 'establish a permit-by-rule system.' Efforts are continually being facilitated. An April auction from the Bureau of Land Management in Utah brought in $5.6 million for 14 parcels of land for leases and potential development. Paul Thomsen, vice president Of business development at Ormat Technologies, Inc., and longtime geothermal energy advocate, emphasized that despite all the efforts made — not to discredit them — the interagency conflicts add to the issue of long-delayed permits. For the last four years, he said the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has put the Department of Interior under threat of lawsuit for granting geothermal permits at the expense of certain fish species. 'We shouldn't have regulatory capture due to the threat of litigation,' he said, 'So we urge the committee to address the interagency conflicts that hinder geothermal energy exploration.' Maloy inquired whether expedited geothermal energy permitting could still be carried out in an environmentally safe manner if it were approved. Thomsen was 'very confident' it could be. 'One of the amazing things about geothermal is it has a footprint disturbance 22 times smaller than solar with integrated storage,' he added. 'We can move the geothermal power plants. We can move the wells and so forth to make them as benign as possible for the surrounding environment. Couple that with no emissions and base load power, the environmental footprint of these facilities is astonishing.' Contributing: Amy Joi O'Donoghue
