Chris Stark, who is tasked with implementing the UK’s clean power plan, has said government will explore using methods usually used for financing nuclear and renewable energy projects for hydrogen storage. “For the really long duration energy storage at the moment… it’s hard to beat hydrogen as a low-carbon energy store that works well with a renewable-power system,” the head of Mission Control said at a committee meeting in Westminster. “We have already acknowledged that we have not put all the market mechanisms in place to deliver what we need to. At the end of this, there will have to be something that gives the incentive to store that hydrogen, because the incentive is not there at present, and the stores are huge.” Stark admitted that there is no “policy framework in place” to support the as-yet-unproven hydrogen storage industry. The government said in October that it intends to hold the first round of a cap-and-floor mechanism in 2025 for long-duration energy storage (LDES). It said the mechanism will support technologies including pumped storage hydropower, liquid air energy storage, compressed air energy storage and flow batteries, but excluded hydrogen storage. Energy secretary Ed Miliband confirmed at the committee hearing that the government is “moving forward with the hydrogen storage business model”. According to market engagement documents, a separate mechanism for hydrogen storage would require new or converted hydrogen storage facilities to be operational by 2028-2032. Stark said at the Environment and Climate Change Committee and Science and Technology Committee in Westminster this month that possible options for financing hydrogen storage include a regulated asset base model (RAB), as used for nuclear, or contracts-for-difference (CfDs). He added that government would seek to bring this through “over the course of this parliament”. “It might be something that looks like a regulated asset

Electric utilities are calling for the U.S. Senate to pass legislation aimed at reducing wildfire intensity and restoring forest health, in part by allowing power companies greater leeway around vegetation management. The House passed the Save our Forests Act on Thursday in a 279 to 141 vote. The bill would “simplify and expedite the most critical forest management projects while maintaining strong environmental standards,” Rep. Scott Peters, D-Calif., said in a floor speech. “It will reduce the threat of litigation, and add new ways for communities to provide input early.” Peters introduced the bill with Rep. Bruce Westerman, R-Ark. The bill would designate certain areas at high risk for wildfires as “fireshed management areas” and directs the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Geological Survey to establish a joint center responsible for duties related to assessing and predicting fires. The bill also includes categorical exclusions for electric utility line rights-of-ways, allowing vegetation management on federal lands to take place without an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement. And it would allow utilities to cut and remove trees near power lines on federal lands without a timber sale. There is opposition to the measure, with some advocates warning the bill cuts important environmental reviews. Environment America said it understands the need to address wildfires but warned the bill could have “devastating consequences for the environment and endangered species.” “The Fix Our Forests Act bypasses critical environmental laws that protect our ecosystems and restricts scientific input and public engagement,” the group said in a statement. Edison Electric Institute interim President and CEO Pat Vincent-Collawn urged the Senate to pass the bill. “We need common-sense legislation to protect more homes and communities and to create a more reliable and resilient energy grid, while helping keep costs to customers as low as possible,” Vincent-Collawn said in

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on Friday unanimously reinstated its approval of a New Jersey-area gas pipeline project owned by Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co., a Williams Co. subsidiary. The agency also unanimously ended a proceeding for potentially changing its process for considering how proposed gas pipelines and other gas infrastructure can affect greenhouse gas emissions. FERC in January 2023 approved Transco’s roughly $950 million Regional Energy Access expansion project in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Maryland. Since then, the company brought the fully subscribed project into service. It increased Transco’s pipeline capacity by 829,000 dekatherms a day to provide fuel to local gas utilities. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in July vacated FERC’s certificate for the project. The court said FERC failed to explain why it dismissed studies showing that the pipeline may not be needed. Also, the commission’s decision not to determine the significance of the project’s greenhouse gas emissions was arbitrary and capricious, according to the court. In its decision to reinstate the project’s permit, FERC reaffirmed its finding that the project was needed. FERC dismissed arguments that utilities would buy more capacity than they needed and foist the additional costs onto their ratepayers. New Jersey utility regulators, for example, will be able to review the prudency of the pipeline capacity contracts, according to FERC. “Accordingly, we continue to find that precedent agreements with [local distribution companies] are probative of market need for new capacity, the same as any other precedent agreement, and that the precedent agreements supporting [Tranco’s] project are significant evidence of project need,” FERC said. Without FERC’s action to reinstate the certificate, Transco would have had to take its facilities out of service on Jan. 28, according to the American Gas Association. “This scenario highlights the need for

Todd Glass is a partner at Wilson Sonsini. The views in this op-ed do not necessarily reflect the views of the firm or its clients. Integrating AI into the global economy is the next transformative technological revolution. American policy makers and corporate leaders alike understand that beyond technological dominance and economic opportunity, leading the AI revolution is a matter of national security. Even Presidents Trump and Biden seemingly agree: whoever leads that revolution will dominate the flow of information, how privacy and security regimes are regulated, what economies and governments are secure (or not), and which nations will drive global economic growth over the next several decades. AI works through statistical operations on enormous databases, so its computing demand is unprecedented. Because computing boils down to the transformation of electric energy into information, the growth and success of AI is directly correlated to the availability of cost-effective electric energy. The supply of electric energy will play a critical role in this global race.  Data center development to meet demand for compute will create massive growth in electric load in the United States at a rate not seen since the 1960s. Fortunately, with targeted reforms, the U.S. can win, while fostering innovation and maximizing value to consumers, by expanding access to its competitive power markets.    The impediment The U.S. electric energy system is no longer designed to deal with such load growth. Utilities in traditional markets have not planned for and cannot deal with significant load growth much beyond 1% per annum; utilities in structured ISO/RTO markets are no longer in the business of serving such load growth. Our grid is aging and processes for accessing the grid are arcane and fraught with project-killing delays. Quite simply, the U.S. is at risk of losing the AI revolution not due to a lack of technological innovation, but

North America added 12 rigs week on week, according to Baker Hughes’ latest North America rotary rig count, which was released on January 24. Although the U.S. dropped four rigs week on week, Canada added 16 rigs during the same timeframe, taking the total North America rig count up to 821, comprising 576 rigs from the U.S. and 245 rigs from Canada, Baker Hughes’ count outlined.  Of the total U.S. rig count of 576, 560 rigs are categorized as land rigs, 14 are categorized as offshore rigs, and two are categorized as inland water rigs. The total U.S. rig count is made up of 472 oil rigs, 99 gas rigs, and five miscellaneous rigs, according to the count, which revealed that the U.S. total comprises 511 horizontal rigs, 51 directional rigs, and 14 vertical rigs. Week on week, the U.S. offshore and inland water rig counts remained unchanged, but the country’s land rig count dropped by four, the count revealed. The country’s oil rig count dropped by six, its gas rig count increased by one, and its miscellaneous rig count increased by one, week on week, the count showed. The U.S. horizontal rig count dropped by four, while its directional rig count dropped by one and its vertical rig count increased by one, week on week, the count highlighted. A major state variances subcategory included in the rig count showed that Texas dropped four rigs and New Mexico dropped one rig, week on week. Oklahoma added one rig during the same period, the count outlined. A major basin variances subcategory included in Baker Hughes’ rig count showed that the Permian basin dropped six rigs, and the Cana Woodford and Barnett basins each dropped one rig, week on week. The Eagle Ford basin added one rig week on week, the count revealed.

Oil output at Iraq’s giant Rumaila field remains reduced by 300,000 barrels a day after a fire last week, according to an official.  The timeline for a full recovery to previous levels of 1.2 million barrels a day is uncertain, said Mohammed Al-Najjar, Iraq’s national representative to OPEC. On Friday, the Oil Ministry reported it had extinguished the fire a few hours after it broke out at tank No. 2 at the DS5 station in North Rumaila.  The Rumaila field, one of the world’s biggest, is jointly operated by Iraq, BP Plc and PetroChina Co., and there are plans to bolster production to just over 2 million barrels per day by the end of the decade. The supply disruption could bring Iraq further in line with the output cap it has agreed with fellow members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, which has been restraining supplies in a bid to shore up crude prices.  After several months of cutbacks, Baghdad lowered output to 4.019 million barrels a day in December, just 19,000 per day above its OPEC quota, according to a monthly report from the organization last week. The country has also promised to reduce supplies below the quota in order to compensate for earlier over-production. Oil prices showed little reaction to the disruption, with Brent crudes little changed near $78 a barrel in London on Monday, after retreating 2.8% last week. Traders are focused instead on the prospect of trade tariffs on a range of major oil consumers and producers threatened by US President Donald Trump.  WHAT DO YOU THINK? Generated by readers, the comments included herein do not reflect the views and opinions of Rigzone. All comments are subject to editorial review. Off-topic, inappropriate or insulting comments will be removed. MORE FROM THIS AUTHOR Bloomberg