Report on the Snowy River Carbon Sequestration Project and Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has issued a decision to significantly limit the advancement of the proposed Snowy River Carbon Sequestration project in Southeastern Montana. This action follows an extensive environmental assessment and considerable public opposition from local stakeholders. The decision highlights a critical conflict between pursuing large-scale climate mitigation technologies, aligned with Sustainable Development Goal 13 (Climate Action), and the imperative to protect local ecosystems, community well-being, and ensure procedural justice, as outlined in several other SDGs. The project’s progress has been restricted to a single test well for further data gathering, reflecting the influence of community engagement on institutional decision-making (SDG 16).

Project Analysis in the Context of Global Goals

Project Scope and Relation to SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy)

The Snowy River Carbon Sequestration project, proposed by Denbury Carbon Solutions, a subsidiary of ExxonMobil, was designed as a significant contribution to climate change mitigation efforts. The project’s objectives directly addressed SDG 13 (Climate Action) by aiming to permanently store industrial carbon dioxide emissions.

1. Original Proposal: The project intended to develop a 156-square-mile area for carbon sequestration, utilizing 15 injection wells to store CO2 thousands of feet underground. A significant portion of this, including 12 wells and over 100,000 acres of subsurface land, falls under federal management.
2. Sequestration Target: The goal was to inject approximately 150 million tons of carbon pollution over a 30-year period. This CO2 would be sourced from natural gas processing plants in Wyoming, linking the project to the decarbonization of the energy sector as per SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy).
3. Financial Incentives: The project’s viability was supported by substantial federal tax credits, estimated to be as high as $12.7 billion, designed to encourage private sector investment in carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies.

Stakeholder Concerns and Institutional Response (SDG 16, SDG 11, SDG 6, SDG 3)

The BLM’s decision was heavily influenced by public feedback, demonstrating the function of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), which calls for responsive, inclusive, and transparent governance. Widespread opposition was rooted in concerns over the project’s impact on local sustainability and well-being.

Key Community Concerns:

• Sustainable Communities (SDG 11): Residents of Carter County (pop. 1,400) expressed fears that the industrial project would fundamentally alter their rural way of life, disrupt traditional livelihoods such as cattle grazing, and negatively impact property values.
• Clean Water (SDG 6): A primary concern was the potential for the carbon injection process to contaminate vital groundwater resources, a critical issue for the agricultural community.
• Good Health and Well-being (SDG 3): Stakeholders cited significant public health risks, particularly the danger of a pipeline rupture. These fears were substantiated by a 2020 incident involving a Denbury-owned CO2 pipeline in Mississippi that resulted in 45 injuries.

In response, the BLM stated, “We’ve heard the public’s concerns, and we’re acting on them.” This action to limit the project to preliminary testing underscores the agency’s commitment to a deliberative process that prioritizes public input before authorizing full-scale development.

Environmental Impact Assessment and Future Outlook

Impact on Terrestrial Ecosystems (SDG 15)

The environmental assessment addressed the project’s potential effects on SDG 15 (Life on Land). The analysis focused on the Greater Sage-Grouse, a species of conservation concern. While the report found that direct habitat loss would be minimal (0.16%) and could be offset by conservation easements, it acknowledged that construction activities could lead to broader habitat avoidance by the grouse, posing a threat to the local ecosystem’s integrity.

Conclusion and Next Steps

The BLM’s decision effectively pauses the full implementation of the Snowy River project, pending further data. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is now tasked with evaluating groundwater data to determine if a permit is warranted, a critical step for upholding SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation). The outcome of this project serves as a significant case study, illustrating the complex challenge of balancing national and global climate objectives (SDG 13) with the non-negotiable need to safeguard local environmental health (SDG 15), public well-being (SDG 3), and the sustainability of rural communities (SDG 11) through strong, accountable institutions (SDG 16).

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article discusses a controversial carbon capture project, highlighting conflicts between industrial development, environmental protection, and community well-being. These issues connect to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that address climate change, biodiversity, public health, water resources, and governance.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The article raises concerns about potential public health impacts, specifically mentioning the risk of a pipeline rupture and citing a past incident that injured 45 people.
• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation: The concerns of local residents about the project’s potential impact on “the water beneath them” and the Environmental Protection Agency’s role in evaluating “groundwater data” connect directly to this goal.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The project’s impact on the “way of life” in rural Carter County and residents’ feelings of being “excluded” from the process relate to the goal of creating inclusive and sustainable communities.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: The project’s core purpose is to “store carbon dioxide emissions,” making it a technological approach to mitigating climate change, which is the central theme of SDG 13.
• SDG 15: Life on Land: The project is located on Montana’s prairies and its potential effects on the habitat of the “declining Greater Sage-Grouse” are analyzed, linking it directly to the protection of terrestrial ecosystems and biodiversity.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The article highlights the importance of public participation in decision-making. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) responded to “abundant opposition” and “hundreds of submitted comments,” demonstrating a responsive institutional process.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

   • Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.
     
     Explanation: The article explicitly notes that the project “could have potential public health impacts if a pipeline were to rupture” and references a 2020 incident where a similar pipeline owned by the same company “ruptured injuring 45 people.” This directly relates to reducing illness and injury from hazardous industrial activities.

2. SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

   • Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution… and substantially increasing recycling and safe reuse globally.
     
     Explanation: Residents’ worries about what the project “would do to the water beneath them” reflect concerns about potential groundwater pollution from the injected carbon dioxide. The EPA’s subsequent evaluation of “groundwater data” is a direct measure to prevent such pollution.

3. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

   • Target 11.3: By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries.
     
     Explanation: The article describes how residents of Carter County, a community of 1,400 people, felt “excluded by the project” and were concerned about how it “would change their way of life.” This highlights the need for participatory planning that includes local communities.

4. SDG 13: Climate Action

   • Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning.
     
     Explanation: The Snowy River Carbon Sequestration project is a clear example of a “climate change measure.” The entire process described—from the proposal and environmental assessment to the public opposition and governmental decision—is an instance of integrating such a measure into regional and federal planning.

5. SDG 15: Life on Land

   • Target 15.5: Take urgent and significant action to reduce the degradation of natural habitats, halt the loss of biodiversity and, by 2020, protect and prevent the extinction of threatened species.
     
     Explanation: The article mentions the BLM’s analysis of the project’s impact on the “declining Greater Sage-Grouse, a target of conservation activities.” It notes that construction could lead the grouse to “avoid the area at a larger scale,” which directly addresses the protection of a threatened species and its habitat.

6. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.
     
     Explanation: This target is demonstrated by the BLM’s actions. The article states, “BLM took public concern to be a strong factor in its decision” and quotes the State Director saying, “We’ve heard the public’s concerns, and we’re acting on them.” The decision to limit the project was a direct response to “hundreds of submitted comments” from the public.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article contains several quantitative and qualitative points that can serve as indicators for measuring progress towards the identified targets:

1. Indicators for SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being)

   • Number of injuries from industrial accidents: The article mentions a past pipeline rupture that “injured 45 people.” This number serves as a direct indicator of health and safety risks associated with such infrastructure.

2. Indicators for SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation)

   • Groundwater quality data: The article states that the “Environmental Protection Agency will evaluate groundwater data.” The results of this evaluation would be a direct indicator of water quality and potential contamination.

3. Indicators for SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities)

   • Impact on property values: An implied indicator is the effect on local economies, as residents “worried about the project potentially driving down property values.” Tracking these values would measure the project’s socio-economic impact.

4. Indicators for SDG 13 (Climate Action)

   • Volume of CO2 sequestered: The project proposed to “inject 150 million tons of carbon pollution over 30 years.” This figure is a direct indicator of the project’s contribution to climate change mitigation.

5. Indicators for SDG 15 (Life on Land)

   • Percentage of habitat affected: The BLM’s analysis found the project would “directly decrease habitat by 0.16%.” This percentage is a specific indicator of direct habitat loss.
   • Status of threatened species: The article refers to the “declining Greater Sage-Grouse.” The population trends of this species in and around the project area would serve as a key indicator of biodiversity impact.

6. Indicators for SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions)

   • Level of public participation: The article mentions that the BLM responded to “hundreds of submitted comments.” The number of comments is a quantitative indicator of public engagement in the decision-making process.
   • Responsiveness of institutions: The statement from a local rancher, “Clearly, BLM heard our voices,” serves as a qualitative indicator of the perceived responsiveness and inclusivity of the governing institution.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article. In this table, list the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), their corresponding targets, and the specific indicators identified in the article.

Source: billingsgazette.com