EPA GHGRP · reporting year 2023 · Injection of CO2

Durango Midstream - rising reported GHG

According to the EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), Scope 1 emissions reported across 2 reporting facilities in 1 state.

MT CO₂e (latest facility reports)
149K
Reporting facilities
2
States covered
1
Overall rank
#860
Watchlist RSS for this company

Data updated May 2026

149K MT CO₂e · 2023

Durango Midstream reported emissions rose 111.8% since 2011 to 149K MT CO₂e in 2023.

  • Overall rank #860 of 2,289
  • #4 in Injection of CO2
  • +111.8% since 2011

Durango Midstream vs all U.S. GHGRP parent companies

Where this parent's reported Scope 1 CO₂e sits among every EPA GHGRP-reporting company

148,720 860th of 2289 higher than 1,429 of 2,289 companies

GHGRP parent companies, banded by reported CO₂e (MT)

Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more companies. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count and share, and where it sits relative to this entry.

Source EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program · 2023

How Durango Midstream spreads its footprint vs Injection of CO2 peers

Facility count against total reported CO₂e for 16 Injection of CO2 companies. A company can lead its sector from one concentrated site or from many smaller ones; the split below uses the median of this peer group (1 facilities, 0.15M MT).

Median split: 1 facilities, 0.15M MT CO₂e among Injection of CO2 peers. 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 16 entities by Reporting facilities (X) and Total CO₂e (million MT) (Y), with a crosshair dividing the plot into four quadrants. Large & distributedFew sites, outsized footprintMany sites, modest footprintSmall & concentrated 02468 0M1M2M3M4M5M Reporting facilities Total CO₂e (million MT) Facility count vs. total reported CO₂e, Injection of CO2
Median split: 1 facilities, 0.15M MT CO₂e among Injection of CO2 peers.

You are here: Durango Midstream.

Injection of CO2 peer footprint table: Durango Midstream, 2 facilities, 0.15M MT CO2e. Archer Daniels Midland, 1 facilities, 3.82M MT CO2e. Exxon Mobil, 1 facilities, 3.16M MT CO2e. Enbridge (us), 4 facilities, 0.73M MT CO2e. Lucid Energy Group II, 1 facilities, 0.57M MT CO2e. Targa Resources, 6 facilities, 0.41M MT CO2e. Stakeholder Gas Services, 2 facilities, 0.3M MT CO2e. Energy Transfer, 3 facilities, 0.21M MT CO2e. Red Trail Energy, 1 facilities, 0.09M MT CO2e. Contango Resources, 1 facilities, 0.07M MT CO2e. Pinon Midstream, 1 facilities, 0.07M MT CO2e. Oneok, 1 facilities, 0.06M MT CO2e. The Williams Cos, 1 facilities, 0.04M MT CO2e. Occidental Petroleum, 1 facilities, 0.04M MT CO2e. Core Energy, 1 facilities, 0.03M MT CO2e. Riverside Energy, 1 facilities, 0M MT CO2e.

EPA GHGRP inventory plate

Parent durango-midstream · 2023 #860 · 149K MT

CO2E-MODEST · MID-PACK · PHOTO-FINISH · FAC-PAIR · SPAN-HOME · SECTOR-INJECTION-OF · TREND-SURGE · BOOK-RICH

  • CO2E-MODEST 149K MT
  • MID-PACK #860/2289
  • PHOTO-FINISH Gepif III Lexington I… · Power Plants
  • FAC-PAIR 2 facilities
  • SPAN-HOME 1 state
  • SECTOR-INJECTION-OF Injection of CO2
  • TREND-SURGE +112% since 2011
  • BOOK-RICH 7/8 fields

Nearest CO₂e peer: Gepif III Lexington Investco · Power Plants (±116 MT)

Instrument codes from this parent’s EPA GHGRP rollup: CO₂e band, corpus rank, photo-finish peer, facility book, state span, sector, trend, and book completeness. Not an EPA grade or compliance rating.

2023 methane-weighted parent mix

Methane leads the non-CO₂ share for Durango Midstream: CH₄ is 8.2% of 149K MT CO₂e in 2023 (N₂O 0%). Non-CO₂ gases total 8.3%. Component shares sum this parent's facility CO₂ / CH₄ / N₂O rows for that year, not a corporate Scope 1-3 inventory.

CO₂
91.7%
136K MT
CH₄
8.2%
12K MT
N₂O
0%
74 MT

CO₂e neighbourhood around Durango Midstream

Lowest and highest poles plus nearest reported parents by CO₂e, not a full GHGRP corpus board reprint.

Vistra · Power Plants · high…86.3MCitizens Energy · Power Plan…149KGepif III Lexington I… · Pow…149KDurango Midstream · Injectio…149KCornell University · Other ·…148KThe University of Iowa · Oth…148KPelican Renewables · Other ·…0
EPA GHGRP parent CO₂e · neighbourhood around Durango Midstream · May 2026

Largest facilities by reported emissions

Durango Midstream - top facilities (MT CO₂e)

Maljamar Gas Plant77KDagger Draw Gas Plant72K

Durango Midstream's largest facilities by latest available reported CO₂e

Source: EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) As of Reporting year 2023

Emissions growth across reporting years

Durango Midstream - rising annual GHG

EPA GHGRP 2011–2023 · million metric tons CO₂e

Reported CO₂e in 2023
149K MT
13 annual EPA GHGRP reporting records
0.04M0.06M0.08M0.1M0.12M0.14M0.16M 2011201320152017201920212023 0.15M

Durango Midstream annual reported GHG emissions, 2011–2023

Source: EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) As of Reporting year 2023

Durango Midstream reported 149K MT CO₂e in 2023, compared with 70K MT in 2011 - a rise of 111.8% across the EPA GHGRP reporting record.

Facilities (2)

Facility Emissions (MT CO2e)
Maljamar Gas Plant
Injection of CO2
Maljamar, NM
77K
Dagger Draw Gas Plant
Injection of CO2
Artesia, NM
72K

Nationwide parents with similar GHGRP profiles

Three EPA GHGRP-derived peer sets for Durango Midstream. The CO₂e neighbourhood chart above shows poles; these links are navigable comparison paths beyond Injection of CO2 browse pages.

Source: EPA GHGRP Data is based on facility self-reporting. Not environmental compliance advice

What to do with this

Using Durango Midstream's emissions profile

  • Durango Midstream runs mid-intensity per facility (74K MT CO₂e/site); see how it stacks up against the rest of the Injection of CO2 sector on the Injection of CO2 industry page.
  • It ranks #860 of 2,289 reporting parents nationwide, compare it directly against specific peers on the compare tool.
  • Not sure how to read a total-CO₂e figure or a per-facility intensity number, the how-to-read guide walks through what each field means and what it doesn't.

Related reading: How to read an emissions profile · Injection of CO2 emitters · Methodology

Disclaimer: This information is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. Data is sourced from the EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP). Consult a qualified professional before making decisions based on this data.