Complete list of press releases

(Washington, D.C. – November 3, 2017) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today announced its plan to review and potentially revise net benefit goals in compensatory mitigation policy on the very anniversary of the presidential memorandum that set net benefit standards two years ago today.

“Reversing net benefit goals for mitigation would be a short-sighted move that would ultimately weaken conservation outcomes for wildlife. It goes against a basic ethic that we all practice when we go camping in our beautiful state and National Parks: Always leave the campground cleaner than you found it. 

“Mitigation policies and programs ensure that impacts to threatened and endangered species habitat are fully offset by long-term enhancement and protection of vital habitat, which in many cases provides the last remaining stronghold for a species’ survival. Net benefit goals help to ensure that this vital habitat is maintained, which helps keep wildlife off the Endangered Species List and on the path to recovery.

“Multiple states have already included net benefit standards in state mitigation programs, most recently for the greater-sage-grouse.

“Weakening U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service compensatory mitigation policy standards will only bring our nation’s threatened and endangered species closer to the brink of extinction. And once they are lost, they are gone forever.”

-        Eric Holst, Associate Vice President of Working Lands, Environmental Defense Fund

(Washington, D.C. – November 2, 2017)  After being rebuked in court, the Environmental Protection Agency took another step Wednesday in its effort to suspend commonsense rules designed to reduce harmful methane emissions from oil and gas operations.

Administrator Pruitt has proposed suspending the standards for two years and today issued a Notice of Data Availability in an effort to support that flawed and damaging proposal. EPA is now seeking to justify its action based on legal theories put forward by the American Petroleum Institute.

“The Trump Administration has been taking its marching orders from the most irresponsible elements of industry since day one,” said Matt Watson, EDF Associate Vice President for Climate and Energy. “EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has made clear his goal is to gut the rules, and now he’s trying to figure out how to justify what he’s planned to do all along.

“Administrator Pruitt is trying to cook the books in ways that fly in the face of accepted science and economics, but he can’t obscure the fact that his actions would allow tens of thousands of wells to continue emitting harmful pollution in communities across the country,” Watson said. “While the rest of the world moves forward, the Trump administration is dead set on keeping the U.S. locked in the past.”

Two weeks ago, the International Energy Agency released data showing that global oil and gas methane emissions could be reduced by 75% cost effectively, using off-the-shelf technologies. Last week, 10 of the world’s largest oil and gas companies announced their intention to achieve “near zero” methane emissions. And in September, Exxon subsidiary XTO announced an ambitious plan to drive down emissions at its operations across the U.S.

At the same time, several U.S. states have proposed and adopted new methane standards, and the problem is receiving increasing attention around the globe. At their last meeting, Ministers from 20 countries identified oil and gas methane as “the next big climate opportunity,” and pledged to take action to reduce their emissions.

“There is no reasonable basis for delay. Leading companies have already proven that, with the right regulatory drivers in place, this can be done,” Watson said. “Once again, this administration is prioritizing the interests of industry’s lowest common denominator and threatening the health of Americans.”

Methane is a highly potent greenhouse gas, responsible for approximately 25 percent of the warming we’re experiencing today. The oil and gas industry is the largest man-made source of methane in the U.S. A report published last week in The Lancet, one of the world’s most prestigious medical journals, concluded that the health of millions of people in the U.S. and across the world is already being seriously damaged by climate change, with impacts falling disproportionately on children, the elderly, and low-income populations.

(BEIJING – Nov. 2, 2017)  The Chinese government today picked the entities that will lead two key systems of its forthcoming national carbon market. China Hubei Emission Exchange was selected by the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) to lead the development of the registration system for the emissions trading system (ETS), and the Shanghai Environment and Energy Exchange was selected to lead the development of its carbon-trading platform, also known as the exchange. The registry issues, tracks and verifies carbon emission allowances and credits, and is the crucial cornerstone of the ETS system. The carbon trading exchange is the platform where buyers and sellers trade allowances and credits.

“China’s decision of the registry and the exchange is a clear signal that the Chinese government is on track with the preparation and the phasing in of a national carbon market,” said Zhang Jianyu, Managing Director for Global Strategy at Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).

“EDF would like to send our sincere congratulations to the Chinese government on the selection of the two platforms, an important concrete step toward rolling out China’s national ETS. The announcement of Hubei and Shanghai to host the national carbon ETS registry and trading platform is exciting and we look forward to continuously deepening our cooperation and ensuring a successful launch and implementation of a national ETS in China,” said Zhang, who is based in EDF’s Beijing office.

Chinese President Xi Jinping announced in a 2015 Sino-U.S. joint statement that China would launch a national emissions trading system in 2017. NDRC’s climate change department chief Li Gao reaffirmed that commitment at a Oct. 31, 2017 State Council news conference. Alongside the news conference, NDRC released its “2017 Report on China’s Policies and Actions Responding to Climate Change,” which stated that the national carbon ETS is underway according to the timetable and plan, and will launch before the end of 2017.

“Today’s decision is another sign that China is stepping up its leadership on climate action, and that’s good news for the planet,” said Nathaniel Keohane, EDF’s Vice President for Global Climate. “Like an increasing number of countries, states, and provinces around the world, China is embracing a market-based approach that has the potential to drive down climate pollution and support greater long-term ambition.”

Background

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) is the first registered international non-governmental organization under the Ministry of Environmental Protection in China. EDF was also involved in establishing China’s first pilot ETS in Shenzhen, and ever since, has been playing an active role in the planning, execution and evaluation of China’s regional pilot emissions trading systems and the forthcoming national carbon ETS. 

In China, EDF has provided extensive and in-depth training to over 5,000 officials and staff members from the Chinese central and local governments, key industrial associations, research institutes, and third-party verification agencies; organized over 10 international study and research tours; established a carbon emissions trading capacity building center and online training portal; set up four carbon trading training bases; and produced scores of training publications. EDF in China has provided technical expertise and a holistic facilitation of the national ETS’s mechanism design, policy planning, capacity building, public engagement, economic model analysis and operational evaluation.

EDF’s pioneering work is a result of 50 years of environmental stewardship with public and private sectors in the United States and around the world. EDF has extensive experience in the development of emissions trading systems, including the U.S. acid rain cap-and-trade program, the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, Europe’s ETS, and California’s cap-and-trade program, and also works with jurisdictions including Mexico on potential new emissions trading systems.

(BIRMINGHAM, AL – November 1, 2017) Environmental Defense Fund and Google Earth Outreach today released online maps showing the location and size of methane leaks from natural gas pipes beneath the streets of Birmingham, Alabama. The maps were created using Google Street View mapping cars specially equipped with technology developed by EDF, Google and Colorado State University, and are designed to showcase new technologies to help operators prioritize costly pipeline repair and replacement efforts.

The utility company Spire (formerly Alagasco), which owns the pipes, has been working to replace aging, leak-prone lines throughout its system. Leaks like the ones mapped by the team don’t usually pose an immediate safety threat, but small leaks can add up. And the escaping gas – which is mostly methane – has a powerful effect on the climate, packing 84 times the warming effect of carbon dioxide over a 20-year timeframe. Spire has 1.7 million customers across Alabama, Missouri, and Mississippi.

“Methane leaks are a challenge in cities across the country, especially where they have aging infrastructure. It’s a loss of customer resources, a waste of national resources, and a serious environmental challenge,” said Jonathan Peress, EDF Policy Director for Climate and Energy. “Replacing old, leaking pipes is an important opportunity to save resources and cut greenhouse emissions quickly. New data like this can help get the job done in a way that’s better for ratepayers and the environment alike.”

The Birmingham maps are online at www.edf.org/climate/methanemaps.

A video on the project is at http://tinyurl.com/MethaneMaps.

The Street View mapping cars collected hundreds of thousands of readings over 345 miles of roadway in selected areas of the city from March to May this year, identifying 168 leaks – in line with expectations for a system the age of Birmingham’s. Spire has about 900 miles of pipe made from cast iron, bare steel, and other leak-prone materials. About 40% of their pipes were installed before 1970.

From 2015 to 2016, Spire cut its backlog of known leaks in pipes by 38 percent and reduced their mileage of cast iron pipeline mileage by nine percent. Despite this progress, Alabama still ranks in the top states for miles of leak-prone pipe. Created from data taken over a period of months, the maps don’t paint a real-time picture. But they do reflect conditions facing Spire and dozens of other utilities, particularly in older cities.

“Safety is core to who we are at Spire, and we’re always looking at new technology to do even better,” said Bob Gardner, Director of Compliance and Pipeline Integrity, at Spire. “That’s why we are coordinating efforts with EDF and Google Earth Outreach to test advanced detection and measurement technology in the communities we serve in central Alabama.”

All utilities are required by law to monitor their lines and immediately fix leaks that pose a safety threat. But other leaks can and often do go undetected or unrepaired for long periods. Over time, the emissions add up.

The leak detection and measurement technology used in this project is more sensitive than utilities typically use, generating far more information than most operators now collect. It is designed to measure the quantity of gas leaking, which traditional survey methods don’t do. The software used in Birmingham is the latest version yet deployed by the team, allowing for greater precision than cities mapped earlier in the project.

“We are excited that Google technology can play an important role here, to power the measurement, analysis, and communication of environmental information,” said Karin Tuxen-Bettman, Program Manager for Google Earth Outreach. “Making this information more accessible can make a meaningful difference in people’s lives.”

“The opportunity to deploy this unique technology allows us to better understand issues facing our city’s energy infrastructure,” said Christina Andreen, staff attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center’s Birmingham office. “Access to this data helps to prioritize replacement of the leakiest pipes throughout Birmingham, which is a win across the board for the customer, utility and environment.”

Utilities in New York and California are already publishing dynamic maps of their natural gas leaks. Sharing geographically-attributed leak data can help regulators and customers track utilities’ leak management performance, and ensure cost-efficient emission reductions. In New Jersey, the state’s largest utility is using data collected by EDF and Google Earth Outreach to maximize the environmental benefits of a $905 million pipeline replacement program.

The team from EDF and CSU spent five years developing and testing their methodology — both the technology and data analysis — proving that it could deliver accurate results in real-world conditions. Calculations were tested for accuracy against controlled experiments using known concentrations of gas, and the researchers conducted validation studies with utility data on leak locations. The system is much more sensitive than those currently used in safety monitoring.

In the cities we’ve mapped for this project, the team has worked closely with both the primary gas utility and relevant local regulators to share the data and validate their findings. 

(Washington, D.C. – October 31, 2017) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt launched two major attacks at the agency’s foundation of sound science today.

In an unprecedented and disturbing move, Pruitt announced new measures that significantly undermine the credibility and integrity of scientific advice provided to EPA. First, Pruitt issued a directive establishing a policy to exclude many impartial researchers from serving as scientific advisors. Second, he announced personnel changes to two major EPA scientific advisory boards that purge highly qualified members and replace them with individuals with direct financial ties to the industries that EPA is supposed to regulate. Many of those new appointees also hold views well outside the scientific mainstream. 

“Pruitt’s actions today are the height of hypocrisy. He is trying to gaslight Americans into believing that industry-funded scientists can offer EPA impartial advice, while those with EPA research grants are biased,” said EDF Chief Scientist Steven Hamburg. “EPA’s fundamental duty is to protect the health of American families from dangerous pollution, and it can only do that by using sound science.”

Pruitt announced today that he is imposing a radical new policy to prevent any scientist receiving research funding from EPA from serving as a scientific advisor to the agency – while still allowing scientists who have funding from industry sources to serve. The move will intentionally skew the panels toward seating scientists with financial conflicts of interest at the expense of academic researchers, who are more likely to receive EPA funding for their research. 

For instance, under the new policy, a scientist funded only by DuPont could have a seat at the table to evaluate science around toxic chemicals, while a University of Texas Professor of toxicology who had received research funding from EPA could not. Perversely, scientists who take money from ExxonMobil, or even Russia (because funding from foreign governments does not appear to be disqualifying) could still serve on the panel and advise EPA, while those who have EPA grants would be declared to have conflicts of interest.

Pruitt also announced changes to the leadership of the Science Advisory Board and the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. The boards are supposed to “provide independent advice and peer review on the scientific and technical aspects of environmental issues to the EPA’s Administrator.” 

Pruitt announced today that Michael Honeycutt will be the new chairman of the Science Advisory Board. Honeycutt is a Texas official who once argued against smog protections by saying that most people spend their days indoors. He also claimed there are scientific studies showing cancer-causing particulate pollution “makes you live longer.”

Pruitt also named Tony Cox the chairman of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. Cox authored a 2012 study that found “no evidence that reductions in air pollution levels have caused any reductions in mortality rates.” 

According to news reports, Pruitt has also appointed other new members to the boards. His new appointees reportedly include longtime fossil fuel and chemical industry advocates who have made some outrageous and discredited scientific claims that downplay or dismiss concerns about climate change, toxic chemical exposures, and the health impacts of pollution.

These include:

• Dr. Robert Phalen, who said that “Modern air … is a little too clean for optimum health,” and children’s lungs need a few irritants.

• Dr. S. Stanley Young, who claims that the “evidence is overwhelming” that if temperatures do increase, it will be “better for humans.”

Pruitt also reportedly took the unprecedented step of removing all Science Advisory Board members whose terms expired on September 30, even though many had served only one term and have traditionally been invited to serve a second term. He also chose to replace the board’s chairman with new appointee Michael Honeycutt, instead of following the usual protocol of promoting an existing board member to the chair.

NEWS RELEASE

(Washington, D.C. – October 27, 2017) Today, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted the Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association (TTMA)’s request to provisionally stay standards providing for improvements in the aerodynamics of freight trailers, safeguards that will reduce dangerous climate pollution while saving money for the trucking industry and American families alike. In a highly unusual action that emerged publicly at the 11^th hour, EPA declined to defend the standards against TTMA’s stay motion. These vital clean air standards also include separate greenhouse gas limits for freight engines which remain in full force and effect.

“We are disappointed that the court allowed a delay of these important climate and public health safeguards that save truckers and families hard earned money,” said EDF General Counsel Vickie Patton. “Importantly, the EPA’s vital limits on climate pollution from freight truck engines, a major and rapidly growing source of pollution, remain in full force and effect.”

In late September, TTMA had asked the court for a stay of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s standards to improve aerodynamics and other aspects of freight trailers. The EPA standards were based on industry best practices demonstrated in EPA’s collaborative SmartWay Program.

At the 11^th hour in the litigation, EPA declined to defend its own clean air standards. This is highly unusual.

Moreover, TTMA and its members made claims to the court that are in conflict with statements the same trailer manufacturers have also recently made to their investors, in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and to the press.  To the court, TTMA asserted, “TTMA’s members will lose sales and customers, and the problem is happening now.” (Motion at 13 link) But to the press, the industry has told a different story, saying, for example, “Steady new orders are being placed for 2018. Dry vans, reefers and flats are all being ordered.”

In its most recent filing with the SEC, a publicly-traded trailer manufacturer noted, “The demand environment for trailers remained strong through the first six months of 2017, as evidenced by our strong backlog, a trailer demand forecast by industry forecasters above replacement demand levels for the next several years, and our ability to maintain strong margins.” And to investors, the manufacturer recently said: “[s]trong demand above replacement levels [is] forecast for [the] next 5 years” identifying “[f]leet equipment dynamics and regulations [as] key drivers of trailer demand.”

EDF and numerous allies opposed TTMA’s request, as did the California Air Resources Board and seven states – Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

The court’s grant of a stay pending judicial review will not affect other provisions of the Clean Truck Standards, which cover vans, garbage trucks, and other large vehicles. It also does not affect EPA’s landmark greenhouse gas limits on the large engines that power freight trucks, a major and rapidly growing source of climate pollution. 

California’s well designed standards improving the aerodynamics of freight trailers, adopted in 2007, remain in full force and effect and demonstrate the benefits of common sense state action. 

EPA and the Department of Transportation adopted the Clean Truck Standards in August 2016, after extensive public comment and engagement with businesses. The standards will reduce carbon pollution by more than one billion metric tons while also saving the trucking industry an estimated $170 billion in fuel costs through 2027, providing $400 in annual household savings for the average American family by 2035, and reducing petroleum consumption by two billion barrels over the lifetime of our heavy-duty trucks.

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has also announced that EPA will reconsider the freight trailer standards through a notice and comment rulemaking process. EDF will vigorously oppose any weakening of these clean air safeguards.

You can find more information, including all the legal documents in the case, on EDF’s website.

(October 26, 2017) Ten energy producers representing one-fifth of global oil and gas supplies today announced a commitment to work towards a “near-zero” methane emissions future. Reducing methane, a powerful pollutant, is a central part of the Oil & Gas Climate Initiative agenda with participant companies (BP, China National Petroleum Company, Eni, Pemex, Reliance Industries Limited, Repsol, Royal Dutch Shell, Saudi Aramco, Statoil and Total) all promising to make prevention of methane leaks a top priority across their global operations.

“Reducing methane across the oil and gas industry is one of the fastest, cheapest opportunities we have to slow the rate of warming today, even as progress on carbon reductions continues. For industry, methane is also a fundamental business challenge – one that will only grow as policymakers and investors worldwide continue to focus on methane’s outsized climate effects, and as competitive threats from cleaner alternatives intensify.

“The single most important factor now is speed. Fortunately, reductions are getting easier and cheaper every day. Earlier this week, the International Energy Agency estimated that it’s economically feasible to cut oil and gas methane emissions by 75 percent with current technology, and that as much as two thirds of those savings can be achieved at no net cost.

“What do these companies need to do to live up to the expectations they created today? They need to set ambitious goals for both the oil and gas sides of the business that match the scale of the challenge. Transparent accounting is essential, and so is early action. This isn’t an assignment that can wait for the last minute.”

                  - Fred Krupp, President, Environmental Defense Fund

(Washington, D.C. – October 26, 2017) Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) filed a lawsuit today to compel the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to release public records about ethics conflicts, activities of senior leadership, and threats to scientific integrity.

EDF requested the records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), as part of our ongoing effort to promote transparency and accountability at EPA and other agencies charged with protecting public health, the environment and natural resources. However, EPA unlawfully failed to respond to the FOIA requests, so today EDF filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.  

“As Scott Pruitt’s EPA rolls back vital protections for human health and the environment, the American people have a right to know how those decisions are being made and who’s at the table at the time,” said EDF attorney Ben Levitan. “The records we requested would shed light on many of Pruitt’s policies that pose an unprecedented threat to the health of families and communities across America. EPA’s failure to provide these records reflects the polluter-first approach with which Pruitt has sought to undermine health and environmental safeguards.”

EDF is asking the court to order EPA to produce records responsive to three FOIA requests for which EPA’s statutory deadline for responding is several months overdue:

• The first request, submitted to EPA more than nine months ago, seeks records pertaining to the assessment of Scott Pruitt’s ethics conflicts after his nomination to head EPA. EDF submitted the request in light of Pruitt’s deep ties to industries that EPA is required to regulate.

• The second request, submitted to EPA more than four months ago, seeks the daily schedules and related information for Scott Pruitt and EPA senior officials. Upon taking office, Pruitt terminated a decades-long bipartisan practice of releasing this information.

• The third request, submitted to EPA more than seven months ago, seeks records pertaining to interference with scientific research and communications. EDF requested these records in light of the Trump Transition Team’s efforts to single out civil servants at the Department of Energy who worked on climate science and policy.

More information about each of EDF’s FOIA requests is below. 

Tycko & Zavareei LLP is representing EDF on a pro bono basis in this case.

You can find more information about EDF’s FOIA requests on our website. 

###

More information about the first request: 

This FOIA request seeks records concerning the ethics agreement that Pruitt submitted to EPA’s Ethics Official while his nomination was pending. Such records could contain important information about Scott Pruitt’s approach to ethics obligations.

Pruitt’s ethics agreement diverged from standard language in government guidelines and did not preclude Pruitt from participating in decisions about the merits of vital public health and environmental protections against which he had actively litigated, such as the Clean Power Plan — America’s only nationwide limits on carbon pollution from existing power plants. Concerns over Pruitt’s ethics conflicts have continued to mount since EDF submitted its FOIA request more than nine months ago, heightening the need for immediate release of these records. 

In August, thirteen state Attorneys General — joined by seven municipalities –submitted a letter to EPA’s Acting General Counsel objecting to a Pruitt guidance letter that expressed a flawed, misleading opinion about a crucial issue in litigation over the Clean Power Plan. The Attorneys General explained that Pruitt’s conduct was “inconsistent with his agreement not to participate in the litigation,” given that he repeatedly sued EPA over the Clean Power Plan when he served as Attorney General of Oklahoma.

Attorneys General for eight states and the District of Columbia also filed formal comments objecting to Pruitt’s involvement in EPA’s proposal to repeal the Clean Water Rule — another safeguard that Pruitt had targeted in litigation. The Attorneys General stated that “a reasonable person would conclude that Administrator Pruitt is not impartial; and the evidence compels the conclusion that he has ‘unalterably closed’ his mind on the matter.” 

More information about the second request:

The minimal scheduling information that EPA has released thus far falls dramatically short of fulfilling this FOIA request by EDF:

• Available information about Scott Pruitt’s activities is troublingly incomplete. Pruitt only recently began sharing a public calendar, which includes minimal information on his activities. Only a limited date range of his more detailed appointments calendar has been released, and it contains many redactions worthy of additional scrutiny. This information does not include meeting agendas and attendees, call lists, travel-related ethics forms, and other information that EDF expressly requested.

• For other EPA senior leadership, EPA has not provided any of the requested calendar and schedule information.

The limited scheduling information released so far by EPA has only reinforced concerns that Pruitt is granting privileged access to favored special interests, at the expense of protecting American families. 

More information about the third request:

This FOIA request seeks directives to EPA scientific staff regarding communication about scientific research, as well as any questionnaires meant to identify scientists who have publicly presented their research. 

Earlier this month, EPA canceled presentations about climate change by three agency scientists, demonstrating that interference with scientific communication is ongoing at EPA.

Pennsylvania lawmakers have introduced a set of amendments to the state budget that, if passed, would pose a direct threat to Pennsylvania’s health and environment by limiting oversight of the state’s natural gas industry.

“Pennsylvania’s elected representatives are working to trade away clean air and clean water in exchange for a deal on a natural gas severance tax. This is bad politics any way you slice it. Access to clean air and clean water are fundamental human rights, not political bargaining chips. Pennsylvania’s elected officials are supposed to represent the interests of Pennsylvania voters, yet these last-minute amendments to the severance tax bill — part of the state budget — do just the opposite by taking power away from the state and handing it over to oil and gas companies.”

• Andrew Williams, Director, Regulatory and Legislative Affairs, U.S. Climate and Energy

Environmental Defense Fund today opposed a Department of Energy proposal to provide new revenues and guaranteed profits to the owners of inefficient, aging coal and nuclear power plants at the expense of American homeowners and businesses. The DOE’s proposal is currently being reviewed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

EDF’s filings – separately and with a coalition of environmental organizations – strongly oppose the DOE’s attempt to diminish, if not destroy, the integrity of competitive wholesale electricity markets through government intervention.

“At its essence, the Department of Energy’s coal bailout aims to create clear winners by sheltering coal and nuclear companies from competitive markets with profit guarantees. But everyone else loses. Americans would pay more on their electricity bills and suffer from dirtier air in return. Our electricity markets – and the companies that compete in it – would be undercut by blatant governmental interference.”

According to EDF analysis, under the DOE proposal the total operating costs that would be paid to eligible coal and nuclear resources could reach over $14 billion. The public health and environmental impacts associated with the proposal are also staggering, with preliminary EDF analysis finding the net incremental increase in carbon dioxide emissions could reach over 70 million tons annually. This equates to the annual greenhouse gas emissions for more than 13 million passenger vehicles.

• Jim Marston, Vice President, Clean Energy

The International Energy Agency today previewed data from its 2017 World Energy Outlook evaluating the role of natural gas in a low-carbon economy. New IEA analysis finds that globally, the oil and gas industry can feasibly reduce up to 75 percent of its current methane emissions. Methane, the main constituent in natural gas, is also a powerful climate pollutant that has increasingly alarmed scientists. IEA says the environmental credentials of natural gas are at risk absent action by the industry to radically reduce oil and gas methane emissions.

“Methane emissions from human activities account for about 25% of the warming our planet is experiencing today. IEA’s thorough and thoughtful analysis makes clear that the oil and gas industry is a major source of these emissions, and that it is also possible to reduce them by 75% with technologies and practices that are available to the industry right now.

“While some oil and gas companies are beginning to tackle methane in earnest, others continue to downplay or deny this problem. Many people already question whether the oil and gas industry have a constructive role to play in a low-carbon future. A failure to drastically reduce methane emissions when it is straightforward to do so only serves to reinforce those doubts.”

- Fred Krupp, President, Environmental Defense Fund

(Washington, D.C. – October 17, 2017) Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and a coalition of public health and environmental groups went to court today to prevent an indefinite delay of the litigation over the Clean Power Plan.

The groups filed a response with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, asking the court to deny the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) request for that delay. They also asked the court to issue a decision on the merits in the Clean Power Plan case. 

In a separate filing, a coalition of 17 states and seven municipalities also urged the court to reject EPA’s delay tactics.

“Communities across America are already suffering from more severe hurricanes, flooding, wildfires, and other devastating effects of climate change. We can’t afford any delay in responding to this urgent threat,” said Tomás Carbonell, Directory of Regulator Policy and Lead Attorney for Environmental Defense Fund, which is a party to the case. “Yet Administrator Pruitt is trying to abandon our nation’s only limits on climate-destabilizing pollution from power plants, and is seeking indefinite delay in the courts to avoid moving forward on common sense solutions to climate change.” 

EPA’s request for indefinite abeyance, or delay, was filed on the same day that Administrator Scott Pruitt signed a proposal to repeal the Clean Power Plan – which would eliminate the only nationwide limit on the largest industrial source of climate pollution in the U.S. The requested delay would extend until the agency completes its rulemaking process, and the agency has not announced a timeframe for that process.

Pruitt has proposed to repeal the Clean Power Plan based on a dubious objection to EPA’s approach to establishing emissions reduction targets, which relies on common sense measures (such as switching to cleaner forms of generation) that power companies have been using for decades to reduce pollution. As today’s filing points out, Pruitt’s theory has already been briefed and argued before the court.   

Pruitt has not committed to providing any replacement for the Clean Power despite the fact that, as two judges of the D.C. Circuit emphasized in response to his last request, EPA has an “affirmative statutory obligation” to protect Americans from climate pollution.

The D.C. Circuit heard oral argument over the Clean Power Plan more than a year ago, in September 2016. Pruitt’s EPA has repeatedly requested indefinite abeyance while it considered whether to roll back the Clean Power Plan. Instead, the court ordered two temporary periods of abeyance, both of which have now expired. 

EDF and its allies have consistently urged the court to rule on the merits in the litigation – the outcome that Pruitt is seeking to avoid through indefinite delay.

The Clean Power Plan is the single largest step the U.S. has ever taken to address the threat of climate change. It would reduce greenhouse gases from the power sector to 32 percent below 2005 levels – and save up to 3,600 lives, prevent up to 90,000 childhood asthma attacks, and avoid more than 300,000 missed school and work days each year. 

Pruitt’s proposed repeal would deprive Americans of this vital safeguard for our health and climate, and employs underhanded maneuvers to conceal the true impacts of his proposal. In the proposed repeal, even EPA acknowledges that the pollution reductions achieved under the Clean Power Plan would have protected children’s health (see page 48048).

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

Today U.S. Senators Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) and Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) released the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP) Improvement Act, which outlines important steps to expand and strengthen this critical conservation program in the next Farm Bill. By addressing needed improvements to RCPP, the 2018 Farm Bill can ensure the program’s public-private partnerships deliver greater conservation outcomes.

“Federal programs alone can only reach so many producers. To catalyze conservation at scale, we need a fresh approach to federal conservation policy that brings new partners to the table, provides flexibility to producers and applies new financing mechanisms.

“RCPP encourages innovative solutions to sticky conservation problems. The bill released today improves the program to maximize its impact.

“It targets funding to projects and regions where it will have the greatest impact, makes the program easier to use and lets partners test new ways to achieve conservation goals. With a focus on accelerating innovation and measuring outcomes, the bipartisan bill will put on-farm conservation on the fast track.”

– Callie Eideberg, EDF Senior Policy Manager, Ecosystems – Sustainable Agriculture

(Washington, D.C. – October 13, 2017) Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and a coalition of public health and environmental groups are asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to protect a key provision of America’s Clean Truck Standards – safeguards that will reduce dangerous climate pollution and save money for both truckers and American families.

The Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association (TTMA) has asked the court for a stay of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) standards for freight trailers – one part of the Clean Truck Standards. EDF and its allies filed an opposition to TTMA’s request last night. 

“The trailer provisions of the Clean Truck Standards are based on cost-effective and widely available measures that have long been used by industry leaders, and have been effectively incorporated into state standards for the past decade,” said EDF Attorney Alice Henderson. “It is critical that these common sense protections remain in place to reduce the dangerous pollution that causes climate change and save money for American families by reducing the costs for shipping goods.”

EPA and the Department of Transportation adopted Clean Truck Standards in August 2016, after extensive public comment and engagement with industry. The standards will reduce carbon pollution by more than one billion metric tons while also saving the trucking industry an estimated $170 billion in fuel costs through 2027, providing $400 in annual household savings for the average American family by 2035, and reducing petroleum consumption by two billion barrels over the lifetime of our heavy-duty trucks.  

The standards, which were set to require compliance in January of 2018, earned unprecedented support from the trucking industry, as well as consumer, public health, labor, and environmental groups. A network of businesses representing more than $437 billion in annual revenue recently reiterated its support for the trailer standards that are now under attack.

However, TTMA filed a lawsuit in December of 2016 asking the D.C. Circuit to overturn the portions of the Clean Truck Standards that covered freight trailers, which contribute significantly to the emissions from heavy-duty vehicles. EDF and a coalition of public health and environmental groups are intervenors in the case, along with the California Air Resources Board and a coalition of seven states. A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit will hear that case. 

TTMA is now also asking for an eleventh-hour stay of those trailer provisions. A stay, if granted, would delay these critical health and environmental protections for the duration of the litigation, which could last for years.

TTMA’s stay request does not include other provisions of the Clean Truck Standards, which cover buses, heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, garbage trucks, and tractors.  

The Center for Biological Diversity, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and Union of Concerned Scientists joined EDF in opposing the stay request.

The California Air Resources Board and the coalition of seven states – Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington – also filed an opposition to the stay request last night. 

You can find more information, including all the legal documents in the case, on EDF’s website.

(BOSTON—October 11, 2017) The following is a statement from the Environmental Defense Fund, following today’s decision by Federal District Court Judge William Young.

“The judge’s decision provides $2.2 million that should be used to fund monitoring on groundfish boats in New England to help fishermen and restore trust that this type of crime can never occur again. In addition, it is crucial that NOAA pursue civil remedies to further aid the victims of Carlos Rafael’s crimes, including fishermen, fishing communities and fish stocks.”