Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
3 min of reading 
0 comments 
ANP’s Proposal to Classify Gas Pipelines Raises Concerns in the Biogas Sector, Which Fears Increased Regulatory Complexity Before the 2026 Mandate.
The National Agency of Petroleum, Natural Gas and Biofuels (ANP) proposed new rules. They define the technical criteria for classifying gas pipelines. The measure, however, raised doubts and concerns in the biogas market. Industry players fear that the new regulation will bring additional complexity. The scenario is challenging, especially with the proximity of the biogas mandate, expected to begin in 2026 under the Future Fuel Law.
What Does ANP Propose for the Classification of Gas Pipelines?
ANP is defining the guidelines for classifying gas pipelines. The criteria are based on diameter, pressure, and length limits. In practice, this discussion determines which assets will be under federal regulation.
The Gas Law of 2021 already establishes cases where a pipeline is for transportation. For example, import, export, or interstate pipelines. The law also assigned to ANP the task of defining the technical limits for other cases. The agency suggests that the classification should be based on pressure and diameter, regardless of the length of the pipeline.
-
Weatherford secures offshore contracts in Brazil through 2030 with operations in the Búzios field and Campos Basin.
-
Oil-bearing rocks: the most oil-rich place on the planet, with more than 30 supergiant fields and 5 billion barrels in each one
-
The United States releases 53.3 million barrels of oil to try to contain the energy crisis and curb global price increases.
-
Alert from the world’s largest oil company: blockade in the Strait of Hormuz removes 1 billion barrels from the market and may take time to normalize.
The Pressure Rule: The Point of Attention for Biogas
ANP’s proposal brings an important exception for biogas. For this biofuel, the regulator defined pressure as the sole criterion. If the pressure is equal to or greater than 36.5 kgf/cm2, the pipeline will be classified as transportation.
Defining classification based solely on pressure may be insufficient. The production capacity of a biogas plant does not determine the pressure of its pipeline. Small plants can use compressors to connect to the high-pressure transportation grid.
On the other hand, large plants can connect to low-pressure pipelines. Often, the choice is determined by the efficiency and characteristics of the nearest distribution network.
A Regulatory Hornet’s Nest: The Debate Over Federal and State Competencies
ANP’s proposal has reignited an old debate. The issue of the limits of competency between the Union and the states has resurfaced. Abegás, which represents distributors, sees the proposal as a risk of market tightening.
State regulators have also expressed discomfort. They point out that the Ministry of Mines and Energy is already promoting a discussion on regulatory harmonization. ANP’s director, Symone Araújo, denied that the agency is infringing on the states’ competence. She stated that the regulation is specific to transportation pipelines but acknowledged that the measure has significant implications for the entire sector.
Risks for Investments and the Future of the Future Fuel Mandate
The new rule generates uncertainty. For distributors, this may impact investment decisions, such as network reinforcements. Abegás questions what the legal security will be for already approved investment plans. The concern is greater because the proposed resolution could retroactively affect existing projects.
Leidiane Mariani, from Amplum Biogas, points out that the discussion increases the complexity for biogas projects. According to her, the pipeline infrastructure is vital for biogas. Less regulatory risk and cost increase the chances of making the fuel viable. The sector is racing to enable projects to meet the incentive policy starting in 2026.
Next Steps: An Intense Debate Ahead
ANP’s public consultation on the topic remains open until July 21. The resolution is expected to be published in October. ANP’s director, Daniel Maia, anticipated that the discussion could raise “effective conflicts” and that he expects an “intense debate”.
The appeal from the biogas sector, represented by Abiogás, is clear. The connection model, whether through transportation or distribution, should be the most efficient. The goal is to enable more business with less impact on producers and consumers. The debate over what constitutes “local interest” versus “general interest” remains an open field for the future of gas and biogas in Brazil.
Be the first to react!