Hilcorp
CEO Jeffery Hildebrand during a meeting with U.S. oil company executives at the
White House on Jan. 9 Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images
It was before dawn on a Friday in January when a Gulfstream G600 with the burnt-orange Texas Longhorns logo on its tail landed at Dulles airport outside Washington, D.C. Its owner, a little-known oil billionaire named Jeffery Hildebrand, had been summoned to the White House. By mid-afternoon he was in the East Room, just three seats from President Donald Trump, who had recently ordered the military raid that captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. Now Trump wanted Hildebrand and two dozen other energy executives to commit to investing $100 billion in Venezuela’s decrepit oil industry.
Many couched their enthusiasm with caveats. ExxonMobil’s CEO called Venezuela “un-investable” without changes to its legal system. The head of ConocoPhillips wanted U.S. government financing. But Hildebrand, a major Trump donor whose wife had been named ambassador to Costa Rica, had already seen how loyalty could be rewarded. Even though he had no notable operations outside the U.S., he hunched toward a microphone and said in a halting voice, “Hilcorp is fully committed and ready to go to rebuilding the infrastructure in Venezuela.”
“That’s good,” Trump said. “You’ll be very happy.”
As the founder and owner of Hilcorp, a privately held company
known for buying up old, low-producing “stripper wells,” Hildebrand needs
Trump’s favor. Long one of the oil industry’s top
polluters, Hilcorp releases unusually large quantities of methane, a
greenhouse gas that can trap 80 times more heat than carbon dioxide.
Hildebrand had never been a leading political contributor. But in
2024, the Biden administration issued aggressive restrictions on methane
pollution — rules that would impose steep costs on Hilcorp — and the
once-obscure tycoon became one of Trump’s biggest oil industry supporters,
giving millions to his campaign.
Trump has since named a former Hilcorp lobbyist to a top post at the Environmental Protection Agency, putting him in charge of an effort to unravel the methane rules with help from trade groups backed by Hildebrand, a ProPublica investigation has found.
That will bring a sweeping reprieve for
the nation’s 700,000 stripper wells, boosting Hildebrand’s profits while
saddling society as a whole with the climate fallout.
Stripper wells collectively contribute just 6% of the nation’s oil
and natural gas. But in recent studies, scientists have
identified them as the source of roughly half the sector’s methane emissions —
in part because they tend to be thinly monitored, run-down and thus prone to
leaking. As a result, these barely productive wells play an outsize role in
climate change, disproportionately amplifying heat waves, droughts and
wildfires.
In a world where global warming fixes can seem impossibly daunting, stripper wells are the rare low-hanging fruit, said Andrew Logan of Ceres, a climate advocacy group. “If you could lose 6% of production and cut emissions in half, who wouldn’t make that trade?” Logan said. “It’s a question of who benefits and who doesn’t, and who has the power.”
“Well Vents Randomly”
Kendra Pinto and Josh Eisenfeld drove a rented Dodge Ram to the
site of a Hilcorp well in San Juan County, New Mexico, last August. As infrared
camera operators with the nonprofit Earthworks, they were used to roaming
through remote areas to investigate leaks at oil and gas wells. But the San
Juan is especially lonely terrain, with bumpy dirt roads snaking between
scattered scrub and rusting pump jacks, the nodding apparatuses that lift oil
and gas from thousands of feet underground.
A sign marked the site as Hilcorp’s Huerfano Unit 119 well, one of
the company’s 11,000 in the region. It was little more than a patch of gravel
hosting two unmarked storage tanks and what oil workers call a Christmas tree:
the cluster of valves that caps the well itself. Drilled in 1969, the well now
produces a small but steady trickle of natural gas, enough to generate around
$50 of revenue per day.
On paper, it runs remarkably cleanly. According to New
Mexico’s oil regulator, Hilcorp has not reported any “venting” — releasing
gas — from the well since May 2024. At the site itself, however, a wire fence
surrounded some of the equipment, bearing a yellow caution sign that read,
“Well vents randomly.”
A Hilcorp installation in New Mexico
in August 2025 Courtesy of Earthworks
Methane is invisible to the human eye. But on June 29 last
year, a
satellite detected a massive methane plume erupting from this very
location. According to the nonprofit Carbon Mapper, a NASA partner that one oil
executive defined as a “platform to disseminate the sins of our industry,” the
methane was being discharged at a rate of 199 kilograms an hour. That’s
equivalent to about 12 times the volume of natural gas the well typically
produces over that time. The cause was unknown, but according to scientists who
have studied the issue, such “super-emitter” events typically stem from some
kind of neglect or malfunction — if not from an intentional release. Most last
a couple of hours, but some can go on for weeks. Super-emitter plumes have also
been identified at other Hilcorp wells.
Pinto and Eisenfeld observed smaller, more persistent leaks as
well. When they trained their infrared camera on one of the storage
tanks, wispy clouds
of pollution could be seen streaming from a pressure-release
valve.
“That shouldn’t just be constantly …” Eisenfeld said, trailing
off. The finding was far from abnormal, though. Of the eight Hilcorp wells he
and Pinto visited that day, seven were seen to be leaking.
In response to a detailed list of questions from ProPublica,
Hilcorp spokesperson Nick Piatek said in an email that the Huerfano Unit 119
well “is fully compliant with state and federal regulations” and that the
company inspects the site monthly. He also suggested that the company’s
approach caused less environmental harm than drilling new wells: “By extending
and optimizing the life of existing assets with pre-built infrastructure, our
model limits the need for new development elsewhere.” The company is “proud,”
he added, of recent efforts to reduce its emissions.
Hilcorp is hardly an outlier in its approach to methane releases. America’s oil and gas system is vast, aging, and in many places largely left to police itself. Of the country’s roughly 1 million active wells, more than two-thirds are stripper wells, each producing the equivalent of up to 15 barrels a day. Many produce less than a single barrel a day.
(Newer wells, by
contrast, can pump 1,000 a day or more.) Each well site, in turn, is equipped
with numerous valves, flanges and other fittings that can leak unless inspected
regularly. Some components were explicitly designed to vent small amounts of
gas — a legacy of an era when methane’s role in global warming wasn’t widely
understood.
A Hilcorp installation in New Mexico
in May Courtesy of Charlie Barrett/Oilfield Witness
Methane, the main component of natural gas, turns into carbon
dioxide when burned to heat a home or generate electricity. But when the gas
enters the atmosphere directly, it becomes a much more powerful climate
pollutant — one that is responsible for one-third
of the rise in global temperatures since the Industrial
Revolution.
Methane exists underground alongside other fossil fuels and is brought to the surface whether oil or natural gas is being pumped. While it’s a valuable product in itself, capturing it is not always cost-effective. So companies often burn it off, or just vent it, sending it straight into the atmosphere.
Apart from the climate impact, this is all sheer waste, as none of
the methane’s energy is being harnessed for a human need. Yet with few
exceptions, federal rules have allowed these practices at wells drilled before
2012 — which include the overwhelming majority of stripper wells.
Methane leakage is such a routine part of oil and gas production that the EPA often assumes it is happening when asking the industry to calculate its emissions. Even so, those numbers drastically understate the actual emissions observed by plane and satellite.
A study
led by Evan Sherwin of Stanford, published in the journal Nature in 2024,
took close to a million measurements to find that the true figures were, on
average, nearly three times higher. Partly that is because companies have never
had to report super-emitter events to the EPA. In one region, nearly 10% of all
the natural gas produced was being lost to the atmosphere, the study
found.
But limiting methane pollution presents a rare opportunity. While carbon dioxide can persist in the atmosphere for centuries, methane breaks down relatively fast, in about a dozen years. Halting these releases, then, would bring a swift payoff. “Methane is the best lever we have to slow the march of climate change in our lifetime,” said Stanford researcher Rob Jackson. That is especially important, he added, as the planet approaches tipping points — temperature thresholds beyond which forests, coral reefs and ice sheets start to collapse irreversibly.
Unlike with other major methane sources, such as belching cattle
or melting permafrost, the technology to curb emissions from oil and gas
operations is already viable, and fairly cheap. In the fight against global
warming, Jackson said, “It’s the best bang for our buck.”
The “Dung Beetle Model”
To build a fortune on the discarded scraps of the oil and gas
industry takes a rare instinct for hidden value, an appetite for risk and an
obsession with keeping costs down.
Among the nation’s stripper well owners, Hildebrand has done it
best, amassing a
fortune estimated by Bloomberg at $15 billion. Yet at a time when many
billionaires are embracing celebrity, he has maintained an unusually low
profile. At 67, he’s almost completely avoided speaking to reporters, and he
didn’t respond to multiple interview requests from ProPublica. Even Trump, despite
having invited him to the White House, seemed hazy on Hildebrand’s role in the
oil industry. “I hear he does a good job,” the president said when reached by
ProPublica on his cellphone.
While he avoids the public eye, Hildebrand circulates openly in
the overlapping worlds of wealthy businesspeople, private clubs and Republican
power brokers. He has been known to hold exclusive parties at his 1,200-acre
ranch in Aspen, Colorado — which used to belong, in part, to the musician (and
environmentalist) John Denver. He also owns a polo team called Tonkawa, a
fixture of the winter season in the sport’s unofficial capital of Wellington,
Florida, a short drive from Mar-a-Lago. A video of a
2021 match shows him in a white helmet and forest-green jersey, riding
a bay pony as he swings his mallet, trying and failing to keep the ball from
the opposing side’s patron, a Russian banker named Andrey Borodin.
There’s a striking tension between Hildebrand’s status as one of
the country’s most prolific polluters and his otherwise conventional life as a
God-fearing, upstanding Texas businessman. He is less a rogue actor than the
product of a deeply American system that rewards production at all costs.
A devout Catholic
and philanthropist, he is especially passionate about wildlife
conservation, according to Stuart Stedman and Karen Starr Hunke, fellow board
members at Texas A&M’s Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute. Yet they
and others who know him through the institute said they’d never once heard him
mention climate change — an omission that points to a far narrower view of
environmental stewardship.
The closest Hildebrand has come to addressing the issue publicly is in a rare speech he gave in 2022, accepting an award as a distinguished alumnus at UT Austin. A husky, square-jawed man, he wore a burnt-orange suit jacket and a burnt-orange tie.
He cited an old quote he interpreted as a celebration of the
oil industry: “Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of
unstinted wealth will gush forth.” Then he quipped that “in this Green New Deal
era we live in” — a reference to the Democrats’ climate agenda — such
sentiments might no longer be welcome.
Jeffery Hildebrand owns and plays on a
polo team called Tonkawa. Joel Auerbach/Getty Images
Born in 1959 in Houston, America’s energy capital, Hildebrand
graduated from high school at a time when oil prices were soaring. Determined
to start his own oil business, he studied geology and petroleum engineering
at UT Austin, where he was in the Kappa Alpha fraternity. He worked briefly for
Exxon and a few other companies, including that of a prominent Houston investor
named Jack Trotter, before starting Hilcorp in ’89 with Trotter’s backing.
The oil business is filled with stories of crazy risks,
near-bankruptcies and improbable rebounds. Hildebrand likes to recount that he
used his wife’s car as collateral for a loan to drill some early wells.
In a speech for his
induction into the Texas Business Hall of Fame, he said they turned out to
be “dry holes” — failures — but the return on Melinda’s investment would prove
“infinite” (only a slight exaggeration).
He started buying stripper wells from larger companies, a niche that is relatively cheap to break into. As a well ages and the underlying reservoir is depleted, pressure in the well drops, and production along with it. The price for a package of these wells tends to be low — one friend recalled “when a big deal for Jeff was $5 million” — but to turn a profit, the new owners have to cut costs.
Typically, they do this by playing
fast and loose with environmental rules, according to Clark Williams-Derry
of the nonprofit Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, who
calls this the “dung beetle model.”
As Hildebrand expanded into other states, loading
up on debt to make ever larger acquisitions, there’s evidence he
followed this model. According to records obtained by ProPublica from state and
federal environmental regulators, his company has racked up dozens of
violations over the past decade. To cite one notable example, after a Hilcorp
natural gas pipeline ruptured in Alaska’s Cook Inlet in December 2016, it
spewed methane for nearly four months until it was finally repaired. Activists
across the country call the company “Spillcorp.”
The penalties, though, have largely amounted to a slap on the
wrist, rarely exceeding $500,000 — and often coming in far lower. “I would
frankly put that in the category of just operating costs,” said Matt Bernstein,
an analyst at the research firm Rystad Energy.
What set Hildebrand apart from other “dung beetles” was that he
also found ways to squeeze out more oil and gas from aging wells, not only
cutting costs but increasing revenue. His secret was what he has called a “pretty simple” formula:
attract top geologists and engineers by offering Wall Street-style incentives,
allowing them to effectively take partnership stakes in projects. According to
a person involved in an early deal, who spoke on the condition of anonymity,
Hildebrand would offer 1.1 times what Hilcorp’s own analysis said an
acquisition was worth, betting on the “magic” of his team.
The 2010s saw the landmark Paris Agreement on global warming, the
rise of teen activist Greta Thunberg and the first pledge by a major oil
company to effectively zero its emissions. None of that dissuaded Hildebrand
from doubling down on aging wells. In 2017, he spent $3 billion to mount his
largest acquisition yet: ConocoPhillips’ operation in the San Juan Basin, where
Pinto and Eisenfeld would later identify so many leaks. Once among the
country’s top sources of natural gas, the region had since fallen into decline
— and it was already notorious for its methane pollution.
Soon after, according to a
Clean Air Task Force analysis of data companies report to the EPA,
Hilcorp became the No. 1 emitter of methane in the entire U.S. oil and gas
industry.
Washington Comes for Stripper Wells
President Joe Biden presented the first serious threat to
Hildebrand’s business. As part of his ambitious climate agenda, the EPA issued
rules aimed at cutting methane pollution from oil and gas operations by a
whopping 80% — and they took direct aim at stripper wells.
For the first time, outside a patchwork of state rules, older
wells would face requirements for regular leak inspections and limits on
venting and flaring. Companies would be forced to respond to satellite reports
of super-emitters, making repairs if necessary. A fee would also be imposed on
excess methane emissions, costing the oil and gas industry an estimated $500
million a year.
Even the Department of Justice got involved, filing suits to crack
down on improper methane releases. One found that Hilcorp had failed to capture
the emissions when it redrilled 145 wells in the San Juan — discharges large
enough that Don Schreiber, a rancher who documented some of the events,
described hearing a “jet engine” sound as the gas rushed into the air. This
time, the penalties were more than a slap on the wrist; although Hilcorp did
not admit to wrongdoing, it settled
the allegations for $9.4 million.
With the new rules gradually being phased in, Hildebrand effectively made parallel bets. Getting a jump on compliance, Hilcorp started upgrading much of its aging equipment — and its methane numbers declined. “That’s a win,” said Lesley Feldman of the Clean Air Task Force, a nonprofit that advocates for cutting emissions. “That means the policy is working. And we’ve seen evidence of other companies doing this too.”
Yet while Feldman celebrated the reductions, she did question
their magnitude. Hilcorp spokesperson Piatek said the company’s methane numbers
had fallen by “nearly 80% in recent years.” But, Feldman said after examining
Hilcorp’s most
recent data, that decline is artificially inflated by recent
changes to the reporting rules, which make comparisons to previous
years misleading. The data itself may be suspect, she added, because the EPA
has yet to publicly verify
it — and Hilcorp has previously made huge upward revisions to its
reported emissions. (Piatek didn’t respond when ProPublica pointed out the
artificially inflated reduction.)
Even taking the numbers at face value, Hilcorp remains one of the
oil industry’s top methane emitters, according to a ProPublica analysis of EPA
data.
Since he was still looking at substantial compliance costs,
Hildebrand’s other bet was to step up his political contributions. Since 2020,
he and his wife have given more
than $15 million to Trump and other Republicans in federal races,
placing them among the top donors in an industry that overwhelmingly supports
the president and his party. (That compares to just over $3 million in the
entire two decades prior.) The recipients have included Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep.
August Pfluger, both of Texas — two of the most vocal opponents to the methane
fee, which they call the “natural gas tax.”
During the 2024 campaign, Hildebrand also co-hosted at least three
high-dollar fundraisers for Trump, who promised to “unleash American energy” by
dismantling climate regulations. One was a lavish dinner held a short drive
from Hildebrand’s Aspen ranch, at a home
sprinkled with art by Andy Warhol (a tiny self-portrait), Damien Hirst
(a mirrored pill cabinet) and Jack Pierson (mismatched lettering that spelled
out the word “badass”). The home belonged to another donor later graced with an
appointment: the investor John Phelan, who would briefly serve as Trump’s Navy
secretary.
Hildebrand co-hosted two of the fundraisers in Houston. One
was reportedly
scheduled to take place at his own home, but, due to security
concerns, it was moved to a hotel owned by the sports and entertainment magnate
Tilman Fertitta, who would be named ambassador to Italy. The other was followed
by a private roundtable where, according to Teofilo Lingi, an investor who was
present, oil executives discussed the methane rules with Trump himself.
The Rollback
At a previous
event with Trump, Hildebrand said, “I’m really here today to represent the
independent energy companies, the family-owned businesses that are in this
industry.”
This mom-and-pop image clashes with the reality that the
independents, as they are known, are highly organized into an alphabet soup of
newly influential lobbying groups — with Hildebrand a member of several.
Hilcorp CEO Greg Lalicker sits on the board of the American Exploration and
Production Council (AXPC), which also represents Diversified, the country’s
single largest owner of stripper wells. At least until recently, another
Hilcorp executive was a director at the Independent Petroleum Association of America
(IPAA), which represents smaller producers, including many stripper well
owners.
In an industry long hostile to regulation, the independents have
often displayed a
more open contempt toward climate policy than the global oil giants.
And they have historically had little say in emissions rules. “They didn’t want
to be regulated, but they kind of knew that was a losing argument,” said Joseph
Goffman, who held top EPA roles under both President Barack Obama and Biden.
Hildebrand received an early sign that was going to change when,
less than three weeks after the 2025 inauguration, Trump tapped his wife to be
ambassador to Costa Rica — even though she was primarily known for charity work
and for opening
a doughnut shop in their wealthy Houston neighborhood of River Oaks.
Melinda Hildebrand didn’t respond to requests for comment, but when ProPublica
asked Trump why he appointed her, he said, “I don’t know, because you know, I
get recommendations. … I see the list of people, but we only name good people,
and I’m sure she’s very good.”
Later that month, the Republican-controlled Congress effectively
killed the methane fee, and Trump nominated a former Hilcorp lobbyist named
Aaron Szabo to oversee the EPA’s climate regulations.
Szabo, an otherwise inconspicuous former bureaucrat, helped to unite two distinct networks with overlapping ambitions. As a lobbyist for Hilcorp and other oil and gas companies, he had already helped to draft a letter from the AXPC opposing the new methane rules.
He
then became a fellow at the Trump-aligned America First Policy Institute and
gave advice on climate regulations for the EPA chapter of the Heritage
Foundation’s Project 2025, the deregulatory blueprint for the second Trump
administration. The chapter specifically recommended dismantling the program to
address super-emitters.
Now tasked with rewriting the methane rules, Szabo has been
seeking input from oil industry groups including the AXPC, the IPAA and the
National Stripper Well Association (NSWA), according to interviews with
industry representatives and current and former EPA officials, records of
closed-door conversations, and agency emails and calendar entries obtained
through public records requests by the watchdog group Fieldnotes and shared
with ProPublica.
“It’s the first time in 20 years of my business that they’ll even
answer the phone,” NSWA Chair Patrick Montalban told ProPublica, referring to
top regulators. He described an informal atmosphere where independent oil
executives called on old personal connections to open the doors. He himself had
met not just with Szabo but with EPA chief Lee Zeldin, Interior Secretary Doug
Burgum and Energy Secretary Chris Wright. He and Wright, he noted, have both
served on the board of yet
another oil industry group. (Press offices for the departments of Interior
and Energy didn’t respond to emails seeking comment.)
The IPAA’s Lee Fuller, on a private conference call with industry representatives, also spoke glowingly about a meeting with Szabo’s office last year. Previously, he said, the EPA had never even considered the group’s requests to create separate methane rules for stripper wells.
This time,
though, agency staff brought it up unprompted — which suggests that it was
already on Szabo’s agenda. Presented with this opening, the IPAA later asked
for stripper wells to be exempted from the methane rules entirely.
Hilcorp spokesperson Piatek declined to answer questions from
ProPublica about the influence campaign. The IPAA also declined to comment but
sent an email linking to a
recent statement of support for deregulating stripper wells that
nonetheless nodded toward “our shared environmental goals.”
The heart of the stripper-well owners’ argument is that they
simply cannot afford to be regulated. “Venting and flaring are essential for
the survivability of low production wells,” an IPAA lawyer named James D.
Elliott wrote in an
email to EPA officials last year. He cited estimates that the methane
rules would force 300,000 of the lowest-producing wells to shut down. Framing
this as a blow to small-business owners, he didn’t acknowledge that it would
have almost no impact on the U.S. energy supply.
The AXPC declined to answer ProPublica’s questions about the
group’s interactions with Szabo’s staff but sent a statement from CEO Anne
Bradbury saying its members were “committed to building on a legacy of
world-leading methane emission reductions.” In a “policy
roadmap” published on its website in March, however, it asked the EPA
to “incorporate greater flexibility for low-producing and mature assets.”
Some members of the coalition have argued, inaccurately, that
stripper wells are not significant sources of methane pollution. In a Zoom
interview with ProPublica, NSWA board member Sam Bradley played a slideshow
that he said he’d shared with Szabo’s staff. One slide purported to show the
emissions from various sources. Stripper wells ranked lower than both the
collective exhalations of the U.S. populace and what Bradley called “smoke and
brisket” — barbecues. (In reality, these are negligible sources of
emissions.)
Hildebrand and his fellow stripper-well owners appear likely to
win exemptions. Speaking with industry representatives last month, the AXPC’s
Wendy Kirchoff shared early details of Szabo’s plan to weaken the methane
rules, confirming it will cover stripper wells, according to a recording
reviewed by ProPublica.
Szabo himself didn’t respond to questions sent by ProPublica, and
the EPA’s press office declined to comment on the details. But the agency
confirmed it is working on a proposal to “provide relief” to the oil industry,
saying in a statement, “We heard consistently from American oil and natural gas
producers (shocker that we meet with stakeholders) that the Biden-Harris
Administration’s oil and gas methane regulations were unworkable and
unnecessarily restricted American energy dominance.”
To protect carve-outs from rollback by a future Democratic
administration, Pfluger, the representative from Texas, and Sen. Cynthia
Lummis, R-Wyo., have proposed
a bill to simply exempt stripper wells from EPA emissions rules —
allowing them to pollute the atmosphere at will, with scant economic benefit.
The NSWA and the IPAA both helped to craft the legislation, according to an
internal newsletter from a state trade group that represents many stripper-well
owners.
In effect, the Trump administration and its allies in Congress are
weighing whether to preserve the business model that made Hildebrand rich, no
matter the cost to the global climate. As energy assets, his wells may be
marginal. But as political currency, they have become more valuable than ever
before.
ProPublica, Alex Mierjeski and Joel Jacobs contributed
research and data analysis.
Contributors: Alex
Cuadros
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.