EPA GHGRP · reporting year 2023 · Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems
Eagleclaw Midstream Services - top-third GHGRP parent
According to the EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), an upper-third Scope 1 reporter: 7 facilities across 1 state (1.2M MT CO₂e in 2023).
- MT CO₂e (latest facility reports)
- 1.2M
- Reporting facilities
- 7
- States covered
- 1
- Overall rank
- #301
Data updated May 2026
According to the EPA GHGRP, Eagleclaw Midstream Services reported 1.2M MT CO₂e in 2023 across 7 facilities in 1 state (ranks #301 of 2,289 U.S. corporate GHG emitters by total reported CO₂e) Emissions increased 2241% over the tracked period.
- Overall rank #301 of 2,289
- #21 in Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems
- +2241.2% since 2015
Eagleclaw Midstream Services vs all U.S. GHGRP parent companies
Where this parent's reported Scope 1 CO₂e sits among every EPA GHGRP-reporting company
1,224,321 301st of 2289 higher than 1,988 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 Eagleclaw Midstream Services spreads its footprint vs Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems peers
Facility count against total reported CO₂e for 21 Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems 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 (21 facilities, 2.77M MT).
You are here: Eagleclaw Midstream Services.
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems peer footprint table: Eagleclaw Midstream Services, 7 facilities, 1.22M MT CO2e. Cheniere Energy, 5 facilities, 9.73M MT CO2e. Energy Transfer, 129 facilities, 8.89M MT CO2e. Hilcorp Energy, 18 facilities, 8.26M MT CO2e. Kinder Morgan, 169 facilities, 8.24M MT CO2e. Enterprise Products Partners, 43 facilities, 7.79M MT CO2e. Enbridge (us), 80 facilities, 5.72M MT CO2e. The Williams Cos, 59 facilities, 5.48M MT CO2e. Transcanada Pipeline USA, 76 facilities, 4.45M MT CO2e. Dominion Energy, 5 facilities, 3.26M MT CO2e. Venture Global LNG, 1 facilities, 2.84M MT CO2e. Sempra Energy, 5 facilities, 2.77M MT CO2e. Berkshire Hathaway, 56 facilities, 2.3M MT CO2e. Targa Resources, 21 facilities, 2.22M MT CO2e. GIP Pilot Acquisition Partners, 26 facilities, 2.08M MT CO2e. Loews, 41 facilities, 1.94M MT CO2e. Occidental Petroleum, 19 facilities, 1.55M MT CO2e. Enlink Midstream, 11 facilities, 1.5M MT CO2e. Oneok, 23 facilities, 1.44M MT CO2e. Ecoelectrica, 1 facilities, 1.43M MT CO2e. IKAV Impact USA, 4 facilities, 1.35M MT CO2e.
EPA GHGRP inventory plate
Parent eagleclaw-midstream-services · 2023 #301 · 1.2M MT
CO2E-MID · UPPER-Q · PHOTO-FINISH · FAC-PAIR · SPAN-HOME · SECTOR-PETROLEUM-AN · TREND-SURGE · BOOK-RICH
- CO2E-MID 1.2M MT
- UPPER-Q #301/2289
- PHOTO-FINISH Red Oak Power · Power Plants
- FAC-PAIR 7 facilities
- SPAN-HOME 1 state
- SECTOR-PETROLEUM-AN Petroleum and Nat…
- TREND-SURGE +2241% since 2015
- BOOK-RICH 7/8 fields
Nearest CO₂e peer: Red Oak Power · Power Plants (±4K MT)
Upper-third parent rollup stamps: CO₂e band, corpus rank, peer, facility book, state span, sector, trend. Not an EPA grade.
2023 methane-weighted parent mix
Methane leads the non-CO₂ share for Eagleclaw Midstream Services: CH₄ is 2.6% of 1.2M MT CO₂e in 2023 (N₂O 0.1%). Non-CO₂ gases total 2.6%. Component shares sum this parent's facility CO₂ / CH₄ / N₂O rows for that year, not a corporate Scope 1-3 inventory.
- CO₂
- 97.4%
- 1.2M MT
- CH₄
- 2.6%
- 31K MT
- N₂O
- 0.1%
- 620 MT
CO₂e neighbourhood around Eagleclaw Midstream Services
Lowest and highest poles plus nearest reported parents by CO₂e, not a full GHGRP corpus board reprint.
Largest sites in a top-third parent book
Eagleclaw Midstream Services - top sites (MT CO₂e)
Eagleclaw Midstream Services's largest facilities by latest available reported CO₂e
Emissions growth across reporting years
Eagleclaw Midstream Services - rising annual GHG
EPA GHGRP 2015–2023 · million metric tons CO₂e
- Reported CO₂e in 2023
- 1.2M MT
- 9 annual EPA GHGRP reporting records
Eagleclaw Midstream Services annual reported GHG emissions, 2015–2023
Eagleclaw Midstream Services reported 1.2M MT CO₂e in 2023, compared with 52K MT in 2015 - a rise of 2241.2% across the EPA GHGRP reporting record.
Multi-site facilities (7)
| Facility | Location | Emissions (MT CO2e) |
|---|---|---|
| Diamond Cryo Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems Balmorhea, TX | Balmorhea, TX | 327K |
| Pecos Bend Gas Processing Plant Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems Pecos, TX | Pecos, TX | 213K |
| East Toyah Gas Processing Plant Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems Pecos, TX | Pecos, TX | 174K |
| PHP Big Lake Compressor Station Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems Big Lake, TX | Big Lake, TX | 137K |
| PHP Praha Compressor Station Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems Moulton, TX | Moulton, TX | 129K |
| PHP 285 Compressor Station Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems Fredericksburg, TX | Fredericksburg, TX | 126K |
| Pecos Gas Processing Plant Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems Pecos, TX | Pecos, TX | 118K |
Nationwide peers for a top-third GHGRP parent
Three EPA GHGRP peer sets for a top-third parent (1.2M MT): nearest totals, facility-book size, then per-facility intensity.
Similar reported CO₂e
Nearest parent totals (1.2M MT here).
Similar facility book
Nearest reporting-facility counts (7 here).
Similar per-facility CO₂e
Nearest average MT per facility (175K MT here).
Source: EPA GHGRP Data is based on facility self-reporting. Not environmental compliance advice
What to do with this
Using Eagleclaw Midstream Services's emissions profile
- Eagleclaw Midstream Services runs high-intensity per facility (175K MT CO₂e/site); see how it stacks up against the rest of the Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems sector on the Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems industry page.
- It ranks #301 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 · Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems 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.