Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Carbon Capture Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee tables bill to repeal Wyoming's carbon-capture study law after testimony
Summary
Representative Knapp sought to repeal policies tied to House Bill 200 and argued market changes justify the move; the governor's policy director and the Public Service Commission provided context on costs and how the statute operates. The committee tabled the bill for a later meeting.
Lawmakers heard dueling policy rationales and technical clarifications on a proposal to repeal portions of Wyoming's carbon-capture study framework and then tabled the measure for future consideration.
Representative Knapp told the Senate Minerals Committee that market forces such as demand from data centers and changes at the federal level mean Wyoming should remove statutory language that he said constrains the state's energy competitiveness. He argued the bill preserves projects already presented to the Public Service Commission and that the state's evolving energy market supports reexamination of the policy.
Randall Luthi, policy director to Governor Gordon, urged caution but clarified the existing statute (commonly referenced as HB 200) "was not a mandate for low CO2. It was a requirement that utilities would look at carbon capture on coal-fired utilities." Luthi described how the law allowed utilities to seek PSC-limited rate increases (subject to a statutory cap) to pay for studies or pilot projects and noted industry interest in CO2 markets such as enhanced oil recovery.
Chris Petrie of the Wyoming Public Service Commission said the PSC's July report found the statute did not establish a statewide low-carbon mandate and that only some utilities have used the surcharge mechanism; surcharges reported in testimony ranged from about 0% to roughly 1.5% where applied. Petrie described the balancing-account mechanism the commission uses and said any unspent amounts would be credited back to customers if projects stop.
Committee members raised questions about downstream customer demand, costs passed to ratepayers, and whether existing projects would be protected under a repeal. Representative Knapp said projects already presented to the PSC were accounted for in the bill draft. With time expired the chair tabled the bill for the next meeting without a final vote.
The committee will revisit the proposal at a later session; no repeal or amendments were adopted at this meeting.
