Michigan Senate Bill SB0396

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 6/10/25
• Refer: 6/10/25
• Report Pass: 9/3/25
• Refer: 9/3/25
• Engrossed: 9/4/25
• Refer: 9/4/25

Caption

Environmental protection: air pollution; regulation of carbon sequestration; provide for. Amends secs. 502 & 1301 of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.502 & 324.1301); adds sec. 52509 & subch. 6, ch. 3 of art. III. TIE BAR WITH: SB 394'25, SB 395'25

Impact

The bill's implications for state laws are significant as it creates a structured regulatory pathway for carbon sequestration, which could lead to an increase in such projects across Michigan. By setting forth clear guidelines and responsibilities for carbon sequestration project operators, SB0396 ensures accountability and compliance with environmental standards. It also establishes funds for community benefits and long-term remediation efforts, promoting economic development alongside environmental protection efforts. Furthermore, the bill serves to enhance monitoring processes to prevent potential environmental hazards that could arise from such projects.

Summary

SB0396 seeks to amend Michigan's Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act to introduce a regulatory framework for carbon sequestration projects. Specifically, it adds new sections concerning the injection, storage, and monitoring of carbon dioxide streams. This bill positions itself as a proactive measure to combat climate change by allowing the capture and safe long-term storage of carbon dioxide, helping to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. By regulating these activities through state oversight, SB0396 aims to both facilitate progress towards climate goals and ensure environmental protection and public safety.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB0396 appears to be largely supportive among environmental advocates and industry stakeholders who view it as a necessary step towards sustainable practices in energy production and climate mitigation. However, concerns exist regarding the adequacy of oversight and the potential for unintended consequences, particularly around public safety and environmental integrity. The discussions indicate a balanced approach that emphasizes innovation while safeguarding community interests, suggesting a cautiously optimistic outlook from various stakeholders.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the degree of regulatory authority granted to the state versus local governments, as well as the potential liability issues for carbon sequestration project operators. Critics raise concerns that the bill may inadvertently lead to environmental risks, including carbon dioxide leaks or impacts on water resources. Additionally, the provision that the state assumes responsibility for regulatory compliance and liability raises questions regarding accountability and enforcement mechanisms. These discussions reflect the broader dialogue on how to effectively balance environmental initiatives with robust regulatory oversight.