Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Methane Capture topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears extensive debate on waste‑mine methane pilot; certification and caps added but final disposition not specified in transcript
Summary
Senate Bill 973, a proposed pilot to let non‑combustion generators use captured waste‑mine methane for RPS credit, drew technical amendments adding third‑party verification and caps; extensive testimony followed, but the transcript does not record a final committee roll‑call disposition.
Senate Bill 973, a pilot program to recognize captured waste‑mine methane as an eligible resource under Virginia’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) when used in non‑combustion electric generators, drew extended testimony from industry proponents and environmental groups. The committee adopted several amendments that sponsors said add verification and caps but the transcript does not record a final roll‑call disposition for the bill.
What the amendments do: sponsors described the changes as clarifying and safety‑oriented. Amendments require producers of waste‑mine methane to use an independent third party to verify volumes and ensure against double counting, and they set an aggregate program cap of 75 megawatts (25 MW for a phase‑1 utility cap and 50 MW for phase‑2 utility projects). Another enactment clause amendment limits qualifying waste‑mine methane for RPS purposes to methane captured from sources issued an API number by the Department of Energy after project approval; supporters described that as a mechanism to ensure new capture is credited.
Support: witnesses for the bill included representatives from CNX Resources (Zach Smith), Mainspring Energy (Kevin Hennessy), McGuireWoods (Chris Nolan), and The New Climate (Mihai Wekler). Proponents argued the pilot will incentivize capture of methane that otherwise vents from coal mines, reduce greenhouse gases, add dispatchable generation, attract investment in Southwest Virginia and align verification protocols with existing low‑carbon gas tracking systems.
Opposition and concerns: Appalachian Voices, the Sierra Club, Virginia League of Conservation Voters and others opposed the bill in its current form. Concerns raised included: the lack of a requirement that methane capture be additional to business‑as‑usual capture; the risk that RECs for waste‑mine methane could displace discounts for true zero‑emission renewables in the RPS; and the potential for stranded asset risk if pilot infrastructure is built but later phased out.
Recorded committee actions in the transcript: the committee accepted a set of amendments that add third‑party verification, specify megawatt caps and clarify RPS eligibility terms. Multiple witnesses testified on both sides. The transcript shows subsequent procedural motions, including a motion to place the bill PBI (pass by indefinitely), and discussion of potential floor consideration, but the final roll‑call outcome for the bill is not specified in the provided transcript. Because the transcript does not contain a clear final roll call for SB 973, this article does not assert a committee outcome beyond the amendments adopted on the record.
Why it matters: waste‑mine methane is a potent greenhouse gas. How Virginia treats captured waste methane — as a fossil‑fuel byproduct or as an eligible low‑carbon resource — affects climate accounting, incentives for capture, and the composition of resources counted under the RPS. The pilot’s verification rules, caps and sunset provisions will determine whether the program yields additional methane abatement or primarily rewards existing commercial capture.
Speakers on record included Senator Hackworth (patron), Chris Nolan (McGuireWoods), Zach Smith (CNX Resources), Kevin Hennessy (Mainspring Energy), Mihai Wekler (The New Climate), Peter Anderson (Appalachian Voices), Blair Santlager (Virginia League of Conservation Voters) and Connor Kusch (Sierra Club).
