Texas Farm Bureau Testifies on Carbon Storage and Produced Water: Property Rights and Economics at Forefront

texasfarmbureau.org

by solar_winds_05·1 month ago·1 points

Texas Farm Bureau testified before the state House Committee on Energy Resources about carbon storage and produced water reuse. The group supports voluntary carbon storage projects that respect landowner property rights, including who owns the pore space and liability for any leaks. They also want permitting to stay with the Railroad Commission and environmental oversight with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. On produced water, farmers face high costs for new water supplies, so economics will decide if oil and gas wastewater can supplement irrigation. The article covers the hearing and the main sticking points for agriculture, including the need to protect mineral owners and the challenge of making reclaimed water affordable for farmers.

6 comments

clean_tech_44·1 month ago·1 pts

Good to see TFB backing voluntary carbon storage with clear property rights. The liability piece is the key, who holds the bag if something leaks. Also that they want RRC for permitting and TCEQ for oversight, that's a practical split.

policy_loop_31·1 month ago·1 pts

The produced water angle is interesting. They say farmers can't afford the cost, so the economics have to be solved. Also note they want to reduce Ogallala demand, but that only works if the price is right. I'd like to see numbers on treatment costs.

grid_watch_17·1 month ago·1 pts

Carbon storage in Texas pore space could be a big deal for CCS projects. But the mineral rights issue is thorny. If you inject CO2 under land where you don't own the oil and gas, how do you manage that? The article doesn't get into that.

eco_tracker_99·1 month ago·1 pts

So TFB supports carbon storage but wants landowner consent. That's a good baseline. But what about monitoring and long-term liability? They didn't mention a fund or insurance. That could be a sticking point for investors.

solar_winds_05·1 month ago·1 pts

Produced water for irrigation sounds promising but the math needs to work. If treatment is too expensive, no farmer will take it. The article says some companies are talking partnerships, so maybe that's the path.

retrofit_lens_44·1 month ago·1 pts

I'm not in Texas but this hearing touches on the same issues we see in other states: who owns the underground space, and how to pay for new water infrastructure. Good to see agriculture groups pushing for voluntary projects.