--- title: "California’s first carbon-storage project begins without state rules" publication: "MediaBias News" url: "https://mediabias.news/climate/californias-first-carbon-storage-project-begins-without-state-rules" api: "https://mediabias.news/api/v1/stories/californias-first-carbon-storage-project-begins-without-state-rules" markdown: "https://mediabias.news/climate/californias-first-carbon-storage-project-begins-without-state-rules.md" audio: "https://mediabias.news/api/audio/californias-first-carbon-storage-project-begins-without-state-rules" category: "Climate" area: "United States" published: "2026-08-11T02:46:37.550Z" source_reported: "2026-08-10T21:45:27.000Z" updated: "2026-08-11T02:46:37.550Z" trust_score: 74 critic_score: 58 hype_score: 22 assessment_type: "coverage-and-source-reporting-analysis" fact_check_status: "not-performed" coverage_measured: "2026-08-11T03:30:50.547695+00:00" --- # California’s first carbon-storage project begins without state rules *The Elk Hills oil field is burying carbon 19 months after a legal deadline for state oversight passed* **Scores for the source reporting** (0-100, assessing the original journalism this article was written from, not this write-up): - Trust 74 of 100, higher is better. Two full reports and 20 digests corroborate key facts. - Craft 58 of 100, higher is better. Most outlets lack direct quotes and specific figures. - Hype 22 of 100, lower is better. Headlines generally match the substance of the reports. Scored by MediaBias News; method at https://mediabias.news/methodology. **The short version** - California lawmakers ordered state regulators to prepare carbon-storage rules in 2022, with a January 2025 deadline for financial and permitting rules. - The state has not adopted any carbon-storage rules, 19 months after the deadline passed. - California Resources Corp. began burying carbon at Elk Hills in May, the first project of its kind in the U.S. to store carbon without enhanced oil recovery. - The project could earn billions in public incentives, including federal tax credits and state funds paid partly by drivers. In May 2026, California Resources Corp. began injecting carbon dioxide underground at Elk Hills, a century-old oil field in Kern County. The project is the first commercial carbon-storage operation in California and the only one in the U.S. approved solely for permanent storage, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nearly four years earlier, in 2022, California lawmakers ordered state regulators to prepare rules for the industry. The law set a January 2025 deadline for regulations on financial responsibility, cleanup costs and a single permitting process. The state has not adopted any carbon-storage rules, missing the deadline by 19 months. The California Air Resources Board, the agency responsible for writing the rules, cited staffing issues as the reason for the delay. Without state rules, California cannot impose stricter standards than federal regulations, which govern the Elk Hills project through the EPA’s injection-well permit. The project could collect billions in public funding. Federal tax credits could yield up to $3.2 billion for the first phase alone if the company scales up injections. California drivers may also fund part of the project through the state’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard and cap-and-invest programs, though the exact distribution of those funds remains unclear. ## What the reports disagree on The reports agree that California has not adopted carbon-storage rules but differ on the potential public cost. The Associated Press and CalMatters, both left-rated, report that the project could earn billions in public incentives. The right-rated Owensboro Messenger-Inquirer digest does not mention the financial incentives. ## What the coverage left out None of the right-rated digests mention the $4 billion state incentive pool or the four public funding streams detailed in CalMatters. None of the centre-rated digests quote environmental advocates or climate experts, though the full reports they republished do. The right-rated digest does not name any environmental groups or state officials beyond the company and the EPA. ## Who covered it Shares of the 17 covering outlets with a published leaning rating: - Left: 41% (7) - Centre: 53% (9) - Right: 6% (1) 5 of 22 covering outlets carried no usable leaning rating and were excluded from those percentages. Coverage measured 2026-08-11T03:30:50.547695+00:00. **Coverage watch:** developing. Checked 7 times; 0 checks found a material change. Most recently checked 2026-08-11T04:30:30.689Z. ## How the sides framed it ### Left - The seven left-rated digests and two full reports led on the absence of state rules and the potential risks of carbon storage. The Associated Press and CalMatters, the only left-rated outlets with full reports, both quoted Michelle Ghafar, an Earthjustice attorney, who said, “If something does go wrong, there are a lot of really important questions about who would actually address those concerns and impacts.” - The left-rated reports also emphasised the financial stakes. CalMatters detailed four public funding streams, including a $4 billion state incentive pool for manufacturing decarbonisation. The Associated Press quoted climate expert Danny Cullenward, who said, “You are also paying a lot of money for very large oil companies to experiment with these technologies in the absence of a regulatory framework.” - The left-rated reports named the environmental groups involved in legal challenges, including Earthjustice and FracTracker Alliance. They also quoted state officials, such as Gov. Gavin Newsom, who called the Elk Hills injections “proof that innovation and ambition are the California way.” ### Centre - The nine centre-rated digests and two full reports focused on the regulatory delay and the project’s status as a first-of-its-kind test. The Associated Press and CalMatters full reports, republished by centre-rated outlets, carried the same details as the left-rated versions, including the 19-month delay and the potential for billions in public incentives. - The centre-rated digests did not quote environmental advocates or climate experts. They did not mention the $4 billion state incentive pool or the specific funding streams detailed in CalMatters. The KPBS digest noted that environmentalists and oil companies disagree on how far the rules should go but did not elaborate. ### Right - The single right-rated digest, from the Owensboro Messenger-Inquirer, carried the basic facts: the 2022 law, the missed deadline and the start of injections at Elk Hills. It did not mention the potential public cost, the environmental groups suing to stop the project or the specific risks of carbon storage. **Provisional coverage gap:** right. The watch is not closed, so this is not yet a settled blindspot finding. ## Factuality profile of the covering outlets These are published factuality ratings of the outlets, not a verdict on whether this story or its claims are true. - high: 12 - unknown: 7 - veryHigh: 3 ## Verification scope This page compares coverage and scores the source reporting. It is not a ClaimReview verdict on whether the underlying event or claim is true. ## Original reporting this was written from - [WCBI TV | Your News Leader](https://wcbi.com/an-oil-field-became-californias-first-carbon-vault-whos-responsible-if-something-goes-wrong) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [The Toronto Star](https://thestar.com/news/world/united-states/an-oil-field-became-californias-first-carbon-vault-whos-responsible-if-something-goes-wrong/article_55ec2b5f-4f5c-59fb-b7b1-f0211a6b2e0b.html) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [Newsday](https://newsday.com/news/nation/california-carbon-storage-rules-elk-hills-j94667) — An oil field became California's first carbon vault. Who's responsible if something goes wrong? - [Associated Press News](https://apnews.com/article/california-carbon-storage-rules-elk-hills-27e3aed63e408eed4eb3d0c6cd3678d1) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [The Standard-Journal](https://standard-journal.com/ap/business/an-oil-field-became-california-s-first-carbon-vault-who-s-responsible-if-something-goes/article_04f3c646-c720-5020-8c53-1d28a8a3a38d.html) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [The Northern Virginia Daily](https://nvdaily.com/associated_press_national/an-oil-field-became-california-s-first-carbon-vault-who-s-responsible-if-something-goes/article_fbf25bce-3377-56e5-93a8-a6e01352359c.html) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [Owensboro Messenger-Inquirer](https://messenger-inquirer.com/ap/ap_national_news/an-oil-field-became-california-s-first-carbon-vault-who-s-responsible-if-something-goes/article_c1ce0bdb-1f05-56f9-ba4a-478aab46889b.html) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [GazetteXtra](https://gazettextra.com/news/nation_world/an-oil-field-became-california-s-first-carbon-vault-who-s-responsible-if-something-goes/article_36b93d6c-009e-5ecf-9384-e3431112ac66.html) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [The Daily Star](https://thedailystar.com/news/state/an-oil-field-became-california-s-first-carbon-vault-who-s-responsible-if-something-goes/article_3055ccc8-9501-54aa-a7a2-fba53a9d93e0.html) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [Goshen News](https://goshennews.com/news/national_news/an-oil-field-became-california-s-first-carbon-vault-who-s-responsible-if-something-goes/article_b9f917c0-fb4f-5341-b0e9-27947884e519.html) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [The Hamilton Spectator](https://thespec.com/business/an-oil-field-became-californias-first-carbon-vault-whos-responsible-if-something-goes-wrong/article_2c1a4544-bc6c-5f24-a762-547ba7ebc945.html) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [NiagaraFallsReview.ca](https://niagarafallsreview.ca/business/an-oil-field-became-californias-first-carbon-vault-whos-responsible-if-something-goes-wrong/article_a7723850-5612-5f0d-958a-04f73746ddfa.html) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [KPBS](https://kpbs.org/news/environment/2026/08/10/an-oil-field-became-californias-first-carbon-vault-whos-responsible-if-something-goes-wrong) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [consumerwatchdog.org](https://consumerwatchdog.org/in-the-news/energy-in-the-news-in-the-news/calmatters-an-oil-field-became-californias-first-carbon-vault-whos-responsible-if-something-goes-wrong) — CalMatters: An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? – Consumer Watchdog - [Winnipeg Free Press](https://winnipegfreepress.com/business/2026/08/10/an-oil-field-became-californias-first-carbon-vault-whos-responsible-if-something-goes-wrong) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [ecotopical.com](https://ecotopical.com/ehn/457503/californias-carbon-storage-began-before-rules-written) — California’s carbon storage began before rules were written - [The Business Journal](https://thebusinessjournal.com/california-carbon-storage-project-safety-rules) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - The Business Journal California carbon storage project begins before state adopts safety rules - [Cal Matters](https://calmatters.org/environment/2026/08/california-resources-corporation-carbon-terra-vault) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who's responsible if something goes wrong? - [Palo Alto Online](https://paloaltoonline.com/calmatters/2026/08/10/an-oil-field-became-californias-first-carbon-vault-whos-responsible-if-something-goes-wrong) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [Danville San Ramon](https://danvillesanramon.com/calmatters/2026/08/10/an-oil-field-became-californias-first-carbon-vault-whos-responsible-if-something-goes-wrong) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [Redwood City Pulse](https://rwcpulse.com/calmatters/2026/08/10/an-oil-field-became-californias-first-carbon-vault-whos-responsible-if-something-goes-wrong) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? - [livermorevine.com](https://livermorevine.com/calmatters/2026/08/10/an-oil-field-became-californias-first-carbon-vault-whos-responsible-if-something-goes-wrong) — An oil field became California’s first carbon vault. Who’s responsible if something goes wrong? ## Questions **Why has California not adopted carbon-storage rules?** The California Air Resources Board, the agency responsible, cited staffing issues for the delay. The state missed a January 2025 deadline set by a 2022 law to establish rules on financial responsibility and permitting. The rules remain unwritten 19 months later. **How much public money could the Elk Hills project receive?** The project could earn billions in public incentives. Federal tax credits alone could yield $3.2 billion for the first phase if injections scale up. State funds, including a $4 billion pool for manufacturing decarbonisation, may also contribute, though the exact distribution is unclear. **What risks does the Elk Hills project pose?** Environmental groups warn that old oil wells at Elk Hills could provide a path for carbon dioxide to escape. The gas can suffocate people in high concentrations and drives climate change. Without state rules, California cannot impose stricter standards than federal regulations. **Which outlets reported on the public cost of the project?** The Associated Press and CalMatters, both left-rated, detailed the potential billions in public incentives. The right-rated Owensboro Messenger-Inquirer digest did not mention the financial stakes. Centre-rated digests carried the basic facts but did not elaborate on funding streams. --- MediaBias News — https://mediabias.news. Reproduced from https://mediabias.news/climate/californias-first-carbon-storage-project-begins-without-state-rules. Please cite as: MediaBias News, "California’s first carbon-storage project begins without state rules", https://mediabias.news/climate/californias-first-carbon-storage-project-begins-without-state-rules