Complete list of press releases

(SANTA FE, N.M. - Apr. 27, 2018) – The New Mexico Environment Department today approved new permits for oil and gas sites that are seriously deficient, constituting some of the weakest oil and gas air quality standards in the nation. They fail to include adequate protections for reducing harmful methane pollution that has made the state the subject of national attention. 

Methane – the main component of natural gas – is a potent climate pollutant and a valuable energy resource. In 2014, NASA scientists discovered a massive 2,500-square-mile methane “hot spot” hovering over the Four Corners region of New Mexico. Subsequent studies confirmed emissions from the region’s oil and gas development were largely responsible for the massive methane concentration. 

A separate analysis of New Mexico’s methane emissions confirms oil and gas companies could be wasting between $182 and $244 million worth of natural gas each year as a result of leaking equipment and other wasteful practices. 

The new drilling permits finalized today include no requirements for companies to check their facilities for these harmful gas leaks, even though, according to the International Energy Agency, oil and gas methane emissions can be cut in half at zero net cost with existing tools and technologies.  

The Martinez administration revised and weakened these permits at a time when the Trump administration is rolling back federal oil and gas standards. The Bureau of Land Management just this week completed a comment period on its proposal to gut methane reduction standards that would apply to oil and gas facilities operating on New Mexico’s public and tribal lands – even though over 400,000 stakeholders, including 47 local elected officials from across New Mexico, submitted public comments in favor of protecting these methane standards. 

The Trump administration’s rollback efforts combined with these latest actions by the Martinez administration also come at a time when oil and gas activity in New Mexico’s Permian Basin is booming. Left unchecked, this boom will mean a commensurate increase in pollution and energy waste in New Mexico as well.  

“These new drilling permits are being rushed through the regulatory process during the 11th hour of the Martinez administration at the expense of New Mexico’s communities, economy, and environment – they are essentially a parting gift to the worst actors in the oil and gas industry,” said Jon Goldstein, Director of Regulatory and Legislative Affairs at Environmental Defense Fund. “New Mexico families deserve policies that work to serve the interests of the people, not some of the weakest oil and gas air quality regulations in the country.” 
 

(Washington, D.C. – April 27, 2018) Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) joined almost a million Americans in supporting the Clean Power Plan by sending formal comments to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) opposing Administrator Scott Pruitt’s “lawless and destructive” effort to repeal the historic climate change protection.

 

The Clean Power Plan “is the most important step our nation has taken to address the urgent and dire threat of climate change,” EDF said in its comments, which were filed last night. “The [Clean Power Plan] will significantly reduce climate-destabilizing pollution from the power sector, avoid premature deaths and disease caused by power plant pollution, and drive broad-based investment and job creation in the nation’s vibrant clean energy economy … The proposed repeal of the [Clean Power Plan] abdicates EPA’s solemn responsibility to protect the health and well-being of all Americans. Administrator Pruitt must abandon this lawless and destructive course of action.”

 

EPA was accepting public comments on its proposal to repeal the Clean Power Plan through midnight last night. Americans across the country urged EPA to keep the Clean Power Plan in place; EDF’s members alone sent about 250,000 comments to EPA supporting the Clean Power Plan and opposing its repeal. More than four million Americans have spoken out in support of the Clean Power Plan since its development.

 

The Clean Power Plan sets achievable limits on climate pollution from power plants, based on cost-effective measures used by the power sector for decades. It was developed after years of public outreach and agency deliberation.

 

EPA’s regulatory impact analysis for the proposal indicates that repealing the Clean Power Plan will lead to as many as 4,500 additional premature deaths and 90,000 additional childhood asthma attacks every year once fully implemented.

 

In October, 2017, Pruitt announced his decision to cancel the Clean Power Plan. Pruitt initially said the Clean Power Plan would be “repealed and replaced,” but so far he has only announced that EPA will “consider” proposing any other limits on climate pollution.

 

In addition to submitting its own comments last night, EDF joined a broad coalition of environmental and science advocates to urge EPA to protect the Clean Power Plan.

 

“To repeal the Clean Power Plan as the Administrator has proposed would represent a stark abdication of EPA’s duty under the Clean Air Act to protect the public health and welfare,” the groups say in their comments. “To throw out the [Clean Power Plan’s] reasonable, carefully-constructed first steps toward addressing the dangers of climate change would be a profound betrayal of EPA’s core duties to the public. EPA should withdraw this hopelessly flawed proposal and get back to its basic duties as the nation’s leading environmental protection agency by implementing and strengthening the [Clean Power Plan].”

 

The Appalachian Mountain Club, Center for Biological Diversity, Clean Air Council, Clean Air Task Force, Clean Wisconsin, Conservation Law Foundation, Earthjustice, Environmental Law and Policy Center, Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, National Parks Conservation Association, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and the Union of Concerned Scientists joined EDF on those comments.

“Scott Pruitt is using his congressional testimony to dodge accountability, blame others, and make his case for a more polluted America. He has repeatedly misled the public about the ethical scandals that surround him, and today is no different. His cynicism – in taking perks, wasting taxpayer money, hiring cronies, and hiding the truth – seems boundless. Scott Pruitt has come to define President Trump’s failure to ‘drain the swamp’ in Washington.
 
“Mr. Pruitt refuses to admit responsibility for the health impacts of weakening limits on air pollution and carbon pollution. He blames his staff for the waste of taxpayer money. He makes clear he thinks there is nothing wrong with his use of a lobbyist’s condo, taking first class flights at taxpayer expense, or backdoor staff raises.
 
“Mr. Pruitt’s ethical scandals will not only increase cynicism but they’ll have a direct impact on the health of American families. By appointing a coal lobbyist as the second in command at EPA, we will get more air pollution and asthma attacks. By hiring an official straight from the chemical industry’s lobbying arm to oversee that industry, we will have more dangerous chemicals in our lives. By accepting perks and giving wide access to industry lobbyists, we will get policies that favor their interests rather than protecting our health. When Pruitt meets with a company and then issues a loophole for their super polluting trucks, thousands more of Americans will suffer serious illnesses.
 
“With Republicans and Democrats publicly demanding answers, it’s time for Scott Pruitt to come clean – about his numerous scandals and about the policies that are making America dirtier. Mr. Pruitt showed, once again, he is unfit for the office he now holds.”
 
Some key takeaways from the hearing so far:

• Pruitt admitted he had lied: He said that he knew about his employee raises, despite having told Fox News on April 4 that “I found out this yesterday.” To this, Fox News’ John Roberts says “this may be the end of the line.”
   
• Pruitt said using a Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) is “normally how you buy real estate in Oklahoma.”
   
• Pruitt encouraged—but would not say he would order—Kell Kelly to disclose more information to the committee on why he was banned for life from banking by the FDIC.
   
• Rep. DeGette asked if Pruitt knew the $43,000 expenditure on his soundproof booth violated the law, as found by GAO. Pruitt says he didn’t know at the time and says they're "investigating internally" the situation.
   
• Pruitt admitted that he did not conduct any ethics review of his condo lease before it was signed.

(WASHINGTON, DC) Today, Canada issued robust, nationwide standards expected to cut methane pollution from the oil and gas industry by 40 to 45 percent.  Environmental groups strongly support the government for following through on its commitment to regulate methane emissions from new and existing sources nationwide. However there is still lots of work to be done to realize the reductions envisioned in today’s regulations.
 
Provinces, specifically British Columbia, Alberta, and Saskatchewan, can either adopt the federal framework or develop their own regulations to achieve the stated reduction in emissions. The federal government must now ensure that any provincial rules achieve equal or greater methane reductions.  Alberta’s proposed regulations could sharply undermine the progress made by the national standards.
 
The oil and gas sector is the largest source of methane and other greenhouse gas emissions in Canada, and cutting oil and gas methane emissions is one of the cheapest, most effective actions to slow the rate of global warming. Canada’s actions are in line with a number of states in the U.S. that are moving forward to reduce methane emissions. In fact, even more oil and gas production is covered by regulations in U.S. states than will be covered under Canada’s regulations. 
 
Despite the ongoing efforts of the Trump administration to roll back methane rules in the U.S., Congress and the courts have rejected their efforts. Global momentum on methane is only growing. Canada, leading U.S. states, industry leaders, investor activists and others continue to move forward to reduce unnecessary releases of this harmful climate pollutant. 

# # #

The US-based environmental organizations listed below have issued the following statement in support of Canada issuing strong federal standards to curb methane emissions from the Canadian oil and gas industry: 
 
Clean Air Council
Clean Air Task Force
Earthworks
Environmental Defense Fund
Fort Berthold Protectors of Water and Earth Rights
Natural Resources Defense Council
Nature Abounds
San Juan Citizens Alliance
Sierra Club
Western Environmental Law Center

(Washington, DC) The Canadian Government today issued regulations to cut oil and gas methane emissions 40-45 per cent, making Canada the first country to limit methane at both new and existing facilities nationwide. The new rules deliver on a critical element of Canada’s climate plan and place it among leading state and federal governments in North America that are controlling these emissions as a way to achieve their energy goals.

“Canada’s new regulations are a sign of international climate leadership and further evidence that global momentum is building to reduce this powerful pollutant. Methane emissions are an urgent climate problem with a clear solution. There are many low-cost, simple fixes that can deliver meaningful and immediate reductions today from the oil and gas industry in Canada and around the world.”

“This big step forward could be erased, if these federal methane regulations are replaced by weaker provincial action. The national government must now ensure that any provincial rules achieve equal or greater reductions.”

—Fred Krupp, President, Environmental Defense Fund

Canada’s methane regulations deliver on Prime Minister Trudeau’s pledge, made in trilateral accord with the United States and Mexico in 2016, to decrease 40 to 45 per cent of oil and gas industry methane emissions by 2025 across the continent.

Methane is a fast-acting climate pollutant, a driver of local air pollution, and a valuable product when recovered as natural gas. The oil and gas industry is the largest and fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions in Alberta, yet multiple scientific studies show that the oil and gas industry is significantly underreporting the scale of its methane emissions, estimated to be equal to $530 million dollars (CAD) of wasted natural gas Canada-wide each year.

(COLUMBUS, OH) The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio today approved AEP’s Electric Security Plan (ESP), which includes numerous developments that will significantly enhance and diversify Ohio’s clean energy economy. The deal, which Environmental Defense Fund and the Ohio Environmental Council signed on to, will avoid unnecessary electricity bill increases, unlock millions in funding, provide customers with more clean energy options, and lower pollution.

The ESP locks in electricity rates for AEP’s customers through 2024 and keeps fixed charges low for residential customers. It also provides over $10 million in funds for an electric vehicle charging station rebate program, as well as over $10 million for microgrid projects to increase grid reliability and resilience. The deal paves the way for additional future clean energy investments to carry out initiatives such as PowerForward, the state’s grid modernization effort, and the Smart City program, which is aimed at implementing smart transportation systems in the City of Columbus. Finally, the agreement will help Ohio transition away from coal, by requiring AEP to build or enter into power purchase agreements for 900 megawatts of solar and wind projects, which could power up to 200,000 homes per year.

“This ambitious agreement is a big boost to innovation and the clean energy economy. Ohioans can expect more customer choice and less pollution, without any unnecessary increases to their electricity bills.”

• Dick Munson, Director, Midwest Clean Energy, Environmental Defense Fund

“We are pleased that the Commission approved the joint stipulation in AEP’s Electric Security Plan III Extension case. Both the environment and consumers will see benefits from this case, and Ohio’s grid will be more reliable and resilient as a result.

The OEC looks forward to continuing to work with our partners and the Commission to modernize Ohio’s grid through thoughtful implementation of EV infrastructure, microgrids, and other technologies, and to ensure Ohio’s infrastructure and rate design moves us toward a cleaner grid as quickly as possible.”

• Miranda Leppla, Clean Energy Attorney, the Ohio Environmental Council

The full decision from the PUCO can be found here. 

Rice University, the Houston Health Department and Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) today announced the launch of a new project to understand Hurricane Harvey’s toll on people’s physical and mental health.

The project, called the Hurricane Harvey Registry, comes eight months after the storm unleashed mayhem on Houston, dumping trillions of gallons of water in a few days. The registry will collect information about health, housing and exposures from Houston-area residents and those who came to the city during the storm. The responses can help researchers and public officials to identify health trends and to develop plans to reduce risk with future storms.
     
“In the face of Harvey’s catastrophic flooding, our Houston community chose to respond with strength, compassion and creativity,” said Rice University Provost Marie Lynn Miranda, the project's lead investigator. “This collaborative work aims to ensure that we understand fully the social and environmental impacts of Harvey, with the goal of developing tailored interventions to help people in the aftermath of large-scale weather disasters.”

Modeled after the World Trade Center Health Registry for people exposed to fire and smoke in New York City on Sept. 11, 2001, the Hurricane Harvey Registry is the first of its kind to collect information about environmental exposures after a major flooding event.

Harvey exposed Houstonians to increased air pollution, water pollution and soil contamination, as well as mold inside their homes, among other threats. The registry’s survey will ask people where they were and what, if any, health effects they experienced before, during and after the storm.

“People wonder what impacts Harvey might have had on their health," said Loren Raun, the Houston Health Department's chief environmental officer and a professor in the practice of statistics, environmental analysis and decision making at Rice. "It’s important to answer that question. The City of Houston will use information learned from the registry to understand how we can respond more actively to health threats from these events in the future."  

The city will gather baseline health information from as many people as possible, especially children, and combine it with extensive environmental monitoring data. People can enroll in the registry online at harveyregistry.rice.edu and through a portal on the city’s website, as well as other outlets. Rice’s Urban Data Platform, a secure system used by the City of Houston and Houston Public Health Department, will house the registry’s data.

"The Urban Data Platform was created to support a deeper understanding of Houston's people, government and built environment," said Katherine Ensor, a Rice professor of statistics and director of the platform. "We are pleased to have this tool available to help understand the social and environmental impacts of Harvey and support the community."
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (part of the NIH), the Cullen Trust for Health Care and EDF provided seed funding for the registry. 

“We expect this work will inform policy and planning that protects people’s health and saves lives in places experiencing more frequent and more powerful storms because of climate change,” said Elena Craft, senior health scientist at EDF, a leading national nonprofit organization that creates transformational solutions to the most serious environmental problems.
 

Today EPA Administrator Pruitt announced a new policy limiting the use of many scientific studies, but EPA has not released the text of the proposed rule.

Statement by Dr. Richard A. Denison, EDF Lead Senior Scientist:

“Scott Pruitt’s proposal to block the use of life-saving science is a gift to industry lobbyists -- and it will cause real harm to American families. Pruitt is obstructing the agency’s ability to use highly reliable scientific information, including data used to determine whether chemicals and pollutants cause cancer, heart disease, and other health problems. This proposal would allow industry to pollute our environment without fear of accountability, because the politician leading EPA told scientists not to use the best science.

“Mr. Pruitt has repeatedly sided with lobbyists instead of putting the health of American families first. Under this proposal, studies which have led to limits on toxic pollutants would be rendered unusable. Next time a major scientific study warns of a danger to our children, EPA may well be unable to act.

“Mr. Pruitt’s proposal would add huge amounts of red tape to the process of scientific inquiry. It would mean, for example, that long term studies – say, following the health of the children of poor women living in heavily polluted communities over years or decades – could not be used in EPA decisions because it could not or should not be ‘reproduced.’ Much of the best health science research is done this way, and leads to life-saving protections.”

Examples of studies that could be excluded:

• Monitoring studies and research followed the Deepwater Horizon BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico to understand its causes and impacts.  The only way to reproduce that work would be to stage another such oil spill, clearly nonsensical. Yet this directive would prevent EPA from using any of the scientific learnings gleaned from the spill in crafting regulations to prevent it from happening again or mitigate its effects.
• Epidemiological studies or workplace health surveillance studies are not “reproducible”; they follow a cohort of people often over long periods of time, to study effects of exposure.

The proposal would also compel disclosure of literally all raw data in any study (including even things like the computer codes of each model used) for any study EPA relies on. That creates two major problems:

• It could prevent EPA from using any study that is based on private information, such as medical records that must by law be kept confidential.
• The costs to EPA of having to review each study it uses and determine whether underlying data can or cannot be released would be enormous, estimated by the Congressional Budget Office as running as high as the hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Without dedicated additional funding to EPA to cover such costs, the requirement would effectively preclude EPA from using thousands of studies.

By limiting what studies EPA can use to help keep us safe, this proposal would make it harder for EPA to protect American families from pollution, toxic chemicals, and other threats. The result would be more serious health impacts – from asthma to cancer – for communities across the country.

NEWS RELEASE

Almost half a million Americans registered overwhelming opposition, as public comment periods closed late yesterday on two Trump administration proposals to tear down clean air and taxpayer protection measures.

Under a Bureau of Land Management proposal, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke would gut requirements that oil and gas companies operating on federal and tribal lands put basic, cost-effective practices in place to reduce waste of public and tribally-owned natural gas resources through unnecessary leaks, venting and flaring. This move would mean approximately $1 billion more in wasted energy resources, less revenue for federal taxpayers and Western communities, and more smog-forming pollution.

At the same time, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt is proposing to rescind guidelines that establish flexible, state-based approaches to reduce harmful oil and gas air pollution in some of the nation’s most polluted areas.

“The remarkable cross-section of citizen groups, local leaders, and members of Congress speaking out against these proposals further underscores just how far outside the mainstream this administration is,” said Matt Watson, Associate Vice President of Energy, EDF. “These proposals will hurt everyday Americans through increased waste of natural gas and more air pollution. Ironically, they will also harm the reputation of oil and gas companies that are trying to do the right thing and tackle the methane emissions problem. It’s time for leaders in industry to step forward and say enough is enough.”  

A wide and diverse group of stakeholders has strongly urged the Trump administration to reconsider these misguided giveaways to the least-responsible actors in the oil and gas industry.

Voices against these rollbacks include Western leaders, a bicameral group of over 100 Members of Congress, local elected officials, Latino Leaders, faith leaders, environmental and conservation groups, and others speaking out against Secretary Zinke’s effort to gut BLM’s Methane Waste Rule. Recent polling has also found three out of four Americans support the BLM methane rules, including 77 percent in Zinke’s home state of Montana.

In addition, over 50 organizations have signed a letter to Administrator Pruitt asking him to reconsider his proposal to roll back the Control Technique Guidelines, a move that will hurt over 25 million Americans living in areas with oil and gas drilling that do not meet national health-based standards for ozone.

EDF members have submitted over 135,000 comments combined against these rollbacks. EDF also joined with other groups in submitting technical comments opposing the revocation of the two rules.

(WASHINGTON, D.C. – Apr. 24, 2018)  An overwhelming majority of executives at top companies say they are using innovative technologies to drive profitability and environmental performance, according to a new survey released today by Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).

More than 70 percent of executives surveyed said their business and environmental goals are more closely aligned than they were just five years ago, primarily due to advances in technology.

The survey, “Business and the Fourth Wave of Environmentalism,” includes responses from more than 500 executives at companies ranging from $500 million to more than $5 billion in revenues. It examines how top executives view and use seven emerging technologies: blockchain, sensors, data analytics, mobile ubiquity, dematerialization, automation, and sharing technologies.

“Innovation and technology are accelerating sustainability efforts from the factory floor to the C-suite,” said Tom Murray, vice president of EDF+Business. “Executives are recognizing how emerging technologies that benefit the bottom line can also improve environmental performance.” 

EDF worked with opinion research firm KRC Research to conduct the survey of business executives across five industries—retail, manufacturing, energy, technology, and finance. Respondents included VP, SVP and C-suite levels and spanned functional areas, including marketing, finance, operations, strategy/executive, and IT.

Major findings include:

• 70 percent of executives say their company is already actively investing in technologies that help solve environmental problems.
• 78 percent believe that new technologies will compel businesses to improve their environmental impact on their own, regardless of pressure from regulators, consumers or investors.
• 75 percent of top companies consider the environmental impact of a technology when deciding to implement it.
• 80 percent of business leaders believe consumers will start holding businesses more accountable for environmental impact because of the ubiquity of these technologies.

“The same innovations that are changing our lives and revolutionizing virtually every sector of the economy can be harnessed to scale solutions to our most urgent environmental challenges,” added Murray. “Fourth Wave innovations can supercharge sustainability efforts by surfacing valuable data that was previously invisible, improving resiliency across global supply chains, and enabling powerful collaborations between industry, advocacy groups and communities.”

Of the seven technologies analyzed:

• Blockchain and dematerialization remain foreign to about 35 percent of business leaders, although they are believed to have the greatest growth potential.
• Data analytics is the most implemented innovation and also believed to have the biggest potential impact on an organization’s bottom line, environmental footprint and brand reputation.
• Data analytics and measurement technology are seen as having as much potential to improve the environment as both cap-and-trade systems and major environmental laws of the 1970s.

“Despite an unpredictable policy landscape, environmental leadership and innovation is alive and well in corporate America,” concluded Murray.

What business leaders have to say about the survey findings:

ALLBIRDS
“At Allbirds, our mission is to make better things in better ways and sustainability has been a core principle since day one. Technologies that improve our data quality and traceability of our supply chain are vital to this mission as they ensure that the benefits of more sustainable choices in materials and operations can be realized by our customers.”

• Jad Finck, VP of Innovation and Sustainability, Allbirds, Inc.

BLOOMBERG
“Good data is the lifeblood of good decision-making. This is especially important for high-stakes, long-term business and environmental issues.”

• Curtis Ravenel, Global Head of Sustainable Business & Finance, Bloomberg

CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY
“I’m constantly thinking about where tech is going not in just two years but in five or 10 years – and what it will mean for the company. Already, we’re seeing that some of the technology tools and innovations in the agriculture space are unlocking opportunities for our business and for reducing our environmental footprint.”

• Dave Stangis, Vice President of Corporate Responsibility and Chief Sustainability Officer at Campbell

CUMMINS, INC.
“There’s no question that our focus on environmental innovation and stewardship, along with our technological leadership, has been a catalyst for company growth and profitability, and has led to an increase in the number of companies that want to partner with us.”

• Tom Linebarger, Chairman and CEO of Cummins, Inc.

GOOGLE
“We are excited that Google technologies are playing a role in collecting, analyzing, and communicating environmental information to reduce methane leaks under city streets in Pittsburgh and beyond. Sharing the data can make a meaningful difference in people’s lives, and help utility operators prioritize costly pipeline repair and replacement efforts.”

• Karin Tuxen-Bettman, Program Manager for Google Earth Outreach

IKEA
“At IKEA, we’re doing everything we can to embrace technology – innovation is a big opportunity for the business and the planet. Technology also stimulates corporate creativity, helps attract top talent and keeps us on the cutting-edge.”

• Stefan Karlsson, Sustainability Compliance Manager, IKEA

MAHINDRA GROUP
“Technology innovation is making sustainability issues part of day to day business operations. At Mahindra, every extra dollar we can spare for new technologies that make us more energy efficient is well invested, as it helps both the business and the environment.”

• Anirban Ghosh, Chief Sustainability Officer, Mahindra Group

NRG ENERGY
“Sustainable business is better business, and the good news is that the technology solutions needed to achieve sustainable outcomes are available today, with more on the way. When companies work to integrate sustainability into business, they ensure that they are fit for not only today’s business environment, but into the future as well.”

• Bruno Sarda, VP of Sustainability, NRG Energy

WALMART
“Doing what’s right for the environment is doing what’s right for business. Most of the environmental impact and the opportunity is in the supply chain.  The Fourth Wave of environmental innovation is all about unleashing people and solutions at scale and we need technology to do that.”

• Kathleen McLaughlin, Chief Sustainability Officer at Walmart

YARDI ENERGY
“Technology innovations are accelerating corporate sustainability, and bringing unprecedented opportunities for businesses to increase profits and reduce environmental impacts.”

• Matt Eggers, Vice President of Yardi Energy

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and a coalition of national, local, and tribal public health and environmental groups are asking the 10^th Circuit Court of Appeals to stay a Wyoming judge’s decision blocking the implementation of standards that reduce the waste of natural gas on public and tribal lands.

 

“The Wyoming court’s decision blocks implementation of common sense protections without considering key legal factors such as the merits of the case. It will result in the waste of extensive amounts of natural gas, the release of harmful pollution, and lost economic benefits for people across the West,” said Peter Zalzal, Lead Attorney for Environmental Defense Fund. “We are asking the 10^th Circuit to stay the decision while it resolves the merits of our claims.”

 

The groups filed the request late Friday.

 

On April 4, a Wyoming court ruled that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)’s Waste Prevention Standards should be paused while BLM considers rescinding the standards. The Wyoming court ruling was not a decision on the merits of the Waste Prevention Rule. 

 

BLM’s Waste Prevention Standards require oil and gas companies operating on federal and tribal lands to take common sense measures to reduce preventable leaks of natural gas. Between 2009 and 2015, those companies wasted enough natural gas to supply more than 6.2 million homes for an entire year. The waste of natural gas on public and tribal lands costs taxpayers millions of dollars and allows large amounts of unhealthy pollution into our air – including methane, which is a potent driver of climate change.

 

In his order, the Wyoming judge expressly acknowledged that his decision ignored key considerations properly weighed by courts in pausing the implementation of protections, such as the likely outcome on the merits.

 

The group’s request asks the 10^th Circuit to issue a stay of the lower court’s stay, saying:

 

“The district court committed an unprecedented legal error when it indefinitely enjoined the Bureau of Land Management’s Waste Prevention Rule … without concluding that the regulation’s challengers had demonstrated the four prerequisites for this extraordinary remedy … Because this error irreparably harms Appellants … every day, [we] move for a stay of the district court’s Order pending appeal.” (Brief, page 1)

 

If the 10^th Circuit stays the Wyoming judge’s order, the Waste Prevention Standards will be back in effect until the 10^th Circuit decides the appeal on the merits.

 

The Center for Biological Diversity, Citizens for a Healthy Community, Clean Air Task Force, Diné Citizens Against Ruining Our Environment, Earthjustice, Earthworks, Environmental Law  & Policy Center, Montana Environmental Information Center, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, San Juan Citizens Alliance, Sierra Club, Western Environmental Law Center, Western Organization of Resource Councils, WildEarth Guardians, Wilderness Society, Wilderness Workshop, and Wyoming Outdoor Council joined EDF in the appeal.

 

You can find more information – including all legal documents – on EDF’s website.

“We strongly agree with Reps. Pallone, DeGette, Tonko, and Castor’s call for EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to testify under oath. With twelve separate federal investigations into his misuse of taxpayer funds, unethical behavior, and conflicted relationships with lobbyists, Congress will have questions that require fully truthful answers. 
 
“Too often, Mr. Pruitt has responded to scandals with misleading or false statements – it’s time to compel the truth. When Fox News asked about huge pay raises for his inner circle, he denied knowledge of them – a claim we now know was false. When asked to explain his arrangement to live in a condominium owned by a lobbyist’s wife, Pruitt’s spokesperson denied the lobbyist had clients before EPA – a claim we now know was false. 
 
“Mr. Pruitt has also offered misleading justification for his policies to allow more pollution. For example, he cited a Tennessee Tech University study to allow more high polluting trucks – a debunked paper that turned out to be paid for by the trucking company that would benefit for this actions.  
 
“The request by these committee members is entirely justified by Mr. Pruitt’s record and the enormous number of questions surrounding his tenure at EPA. It is sad that we have an EPA administrator we can’t trust to tell the full truth, but that has proven to be the case.”

—Elgie Holstein, Senior Director for Strategic Planning, Environmental Defense Fund

Today a “sense of Congress” resolution was introduced calling on President Trump to fire EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. The resolution, introduced by Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) and Representative Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), comes on the heels of numerous ethical scandals that have consumed Pruitt’s tenure. It is the first time since 1981 that this many in Congress have called for an EPA to be removed.  
 
“Today’s resolution adds an exclamation point to the overwhelming chorus of Americans who recognize that Scott Pruitt is unfit to lead the Environmental Protection Agency. Pruitt presents a real danger to the health and well-being of American families, and he has routinely shown contempt for the rule of law, ethical behavior, and taxpayers. 
 
Pruitt’s behavior has come to define the swamp that President Trump vowed to drain. He sees nothing wrong with accepting benefits from the family of an energy lobbyist, spending lavishly on travel at taxpayer expense, and giving preferential treatment to friends and industry insiders. He has no place at the head of a government agency dedicated to protecting people and our environment, or any agency.  
 
President Trump should heed the calls of both Republican and Democratic officials who believe Pruitt is not fit to hold this public trust.”

—Jeremy Symons, VP Political Affairs, Environmental Defense Fund

WASHINGTON, DC – Today the House Agriculture Committee passed H.R. 2, the Agriculture and Nutrition Act of 2018, on a party-line vote.

“Many individual conservation programs have solid funding levels in the House farm bill, but the entire conservation title needs strong, long-term funding – now more than ever.

“Farm bill conservation programs provide farmers with certainty in a down farm economy. In the face of low commodity prices, looming trade restrictions and a global population approaching ten billion, substantial and sustained conservation funding is critical for building an economically and environmentally resilient food supply.”

• Callie Eideberg, Senior Policy Manager, Sustainable Agriculture

 

(BISMARCK, ND – Apr. 17, 2018) Today, the North Dakota Industrial Commission amended the state’s gas capture rules in an attempt to limit flaring of natural gas. The amendments came at the recommendation of the North Dakota Petroleum Council’s flaring task force, which was reconvened last February. The original gas capture rules were first implemented in 2014, when the state was burning off roughly one-third of the gas it produced. 

“Instead of addressing the true deficiencies in the current flaring policy, which it has been loath to enforce, the North Dakota Industrial Commission further weakened it by expanding loopholes and exemptions. Operators in the state have already wasted $850 million worth of natural gas by flaring. It’s a problem likely to get worse.

“Those seeking to roll back the Bureau of Land Management methane waste protections for federal and tribal lands often point to state policies that they say obviate the need for a federal response. North Dakota’s failed effort to curb flaring, however, is a prime example of why rolling back these protections is a bad idea.”
 

• Dan Grossman, National Director of State Programs, Oil and Gas