Complete list of press releases

(Austin, TX) A new report published today by Environmental Defense Fund tracks tens of thousands of oil and gas wells and other facilities as they were shifted from publicly traded companies to private ones, and from operators that have climate commitments to those without, documenting dramatic emissions increases that have followed.

“These transactions can make it look as though sellers have cut emissions, when in fact pollution is simply being shifted to companies with lower standards,” said Andrew Baxter, director of energy transition at EDF. “Regardless of the sellers’ intent, the result is that millions of tons of emissions effectively disappear from the public eye, likely forever. And as these wells and other assets age under diminished oversight, the environmental challenges only get worse.”

Such deals are growing in both number and scale, reaching $192 billion in 2021 alone. Using industry and financial data on 3,000 major transactions over the past five years, EDF analysts identified hundreds of cases in which upstream assets owned by top-tier global producers that have made public commitments to cut methane emissions, stop flaring and improve transparency were sold off to new, often obscure operators with no such obligations.

Concern is shared by a growing number of investors and other stakeholders about losing the ability to assess company risk or hold operators accountable for emissions commitments. The report also suggests there might be implications for financiers themselves, noting that since 2017, five of the six largest U.S. banks – all of which are members of the Net Zero Banking Alliance – advised on upstream deals totaling $566 billion.

“Climate risk is business risk. Ensuring proper environmental stewardship of assets is critical to the oil and gas industry retaining its social license to operate in the face of an energy transition to a decarbonized economy,” Chris James, executive chairman of Engine No.1, the investment fund that placed three directors on the board of Exxon Mobil with the goal of pushing the company to reduce its emissions. “Mergers and acquisitions will forever remain a core part of the industry, and a strong focus on environmental performance, irrespective of owner, is something all parties should embrace.”

The authors used M&A data from Refinitiv to track upstream oil and gas transactions from January 2017 to December 2021, working with oil and gas analytics firms Capterio and ESG Dynamics to track changes in climate performance following a sampling of the transactions. Measuring against key climate metrics, EDF analysts found:

• 298 deals worth $144.9 billion have transferred assets from companies with flaring commitments to those without.
• 211 deals totaling $115.6 billion have shifted assets away from companies with methane emissions goals to companies lacking targets.
• 155 deals worth $86.4 billion have moved assets away from companies publicly aligned with net-zero emissions goals.
• 150 deals totaling $76.8 billion have shifted assets from members of the industry’s Oil & Gas Methane Partnership to non-members.

The report says that oil and gas companies, private buyers, investors, and banks should be encouraged to incorporate climate safeguards in the terms of these deals to ensure continued stewardship following M&A transactions.

“Oil and gas companies can’t sell their way out of climate responsibility. Shareholders need companies to substantially reduce emissions in a real way,” said EDF’s Baxter. “Business-as-usual is pushing us toward catastrophe. A net zero economy requires net zero M&A with safeguards enforced by banks, companies, and investors. A successful energy demands new models of oil and gas dealmaking that take environmental impact into account.”

What other investors say about the new analysis:

"What the markets need to understand as part of these transactions is whether the new owners are establishing the governance needed for climate stewardship consistent with a net zero future. GFANZ supports efforts to finance emissions reductions across the economy, not just transfer emissions through divestment alone. This report provides insight into this challenge with innovative ideas to help solve them.”

-- Mary Schapiro, vice chair at Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero

“The analysis suggests that oil and gas M&A is resulting in increased emissions that delay the energy transition. Institutional investors committed to achieving net zero in their portfolios (and in the real world) will want to scrutinize these findings closely. Encouraging good stewardship and closing this loophole may ultimately require enhanced disclosures from buying, selling and financing parties.”

-- Dan Gardiner, transition plan specialist at Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change.

“Climate-aligned energy companies have a responsibility to make sure that when they sell assets, their environmental commitments continue to be honored by the new owners. Adequate and consistent disclosure will be the key to ensuring that assets’ emissions are being managed after a sale.”

-- Patrick O’Connell, SVP & director of fixed income responsible investing research, AllianceBernstein

“With asset sales being a key strategic component in the road to net zero for public oil and gas companies, investors would benefit from a greater level of disclosure around the application of responsible divestment standards in the selling process. While we note the inherent challenges in the decarbonization efforts of this sector, we strongly believe the introduction of such standards is essential to ensure the potential negative impact on climate change is appropriately managed and accounted for.”

-- Dror Elkayam, CFA, ESG analyst, Legal & General Investment Management

“As oil and gas companies jettison assets to meet stakeholder expectations, there is danger of increased climate impacts and risks overall, because the buyers generally operate with lower climate ambition and less oversight. Asset sellers must ensure that climate commitments follow the assets and continue to be enforced. It is critical that the industry, financial institutions, and civil society come together to craft and implement meaningful solutions now.”

-- Andrew Logan, senior director, oil and gas, Ceres

“The Fifth Circuit appropriately lifted a deeply flawed and unnecessary stay by a lower court, allowing policy makers to continue protecting people from climate pollution using the most up-to-date science. There is no need for Supreme Court intervention, and no reason to overrule the Fifth Circuit.”

            - Rosalie Winn, Director of Methane and Clean Air Policy, Environmental Defense Fund  

BACKGROUND

A federal district court judge in Louisiana issued a preliminary injunction in February restricting the Biden administration from using the latest social cost of carbon and other climate pollutants. These estimates reflect the best available scientific and economic analysis, based on extensive peer-reviewed information, to determine the monetary costs imposed by climate change. The government uses it to evaluate climate damage when establishing policies.

In March a panel of judges on the Fifth Circuit issued a stay of that injunction. The judges found that the Biden administration is likely to prevail on the merits when the case is fully heard. The full Fifth Circuit later declined to reconsider the stay.

Today the states of Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Dakota, Texas, West Virginia and Wyoming asked the Supreme Court to intervene and reimpose the stay.

(Santa Barbara, Calif.– Apr. 27, 2022) The global population is expected to exceed 10 billion people in our grandchildren’s lifetimes. That’s a lot of people to feed. Traditional, land-based means of meat production are facing hard limits for expansion and challenges brought on by climate change, making the ocean an important source of protein as we strive to feed three billion more people than we have today.

In a paper published in the journal Nature, an international collaboration of researchers takes a thorough look at the potential of a warming ocean to satisfy the growing global appetite.

“Climate change will challenge the ability for the ocean to meet the seafood demands of a growing population,” said Christopher Free, a researcher in the UC Santa Barbara Bren School of Environmental Science & Management and lead author of the paper. “However the ocean could produce more food than today through swift and ambitious actions.”

Future-proofing the food supply

Currently supplying only 17% of the world’s protein supply, most of it wild-caught, the ocean holds great potential to help satisfy the global demand for meat, which is expected to keep growing — especially as developing countries grow richer.

But it’s also subject to global greenhouse gas emissions, which results in effects such as warming and acidification — phenomena that are expected to decrease the ocean’s ability to meet the seafood demands of a growing population.

“Warming waters are changing where fish can live, what prey they can eat, and how well they can survive,” said Free. “Both fishers and fisheries managers have to adapt to these changes.”

Fisheries can maintain or increase their yields by adapting their practices to shifts in the productivity and location of their fish stocks, the researchers said. However, these reforms alone, though necessary, will be insufficient to fulfill future demand. Finfish and shellfish farms will be essential to fill that gap.

“Expansion of sustainable ocean aquaculture could build on fisheries reforms to increase the availability of healthy and sustainable seafood to our growing population,” said Halley Froehlich, an assistant professor at UC Santa Barbara and co-author of the paper. According to the study, the expansion of mariculture is projected to be limited by consumer demand or availability of feed ingredients derived from wild fisheries, rather than by climate change. With the appropriate selection of species and location, for example, the researchers found that “the availability of area for profitable finfish mariculture to be insensitive to changing temperature, oxygenation and salinity.”

Additionally, because food production by its nature generates impacts to the environment, the sustainable expansion of mariculture must be conducted carefully.

“It will require improved governance to ensure best practices that minimize impacts on ocean ecosystems and encourage equitable access to this growing industry,” said Willow Battista, a senior manager at the Environmental Defense Fund and also a co-author on the paper.

What this sweet spot of governance looks like will vary by location. In highly regulated geographies such as the United States, mariculture regulations may need to be more well defined to allow sustainable mariculture to grow. In weakly regulated regions, such as China or Thailand, standards will have to be maintained to prevent inefficiencies and ecosystem degradation. Regions where little or no historical mariculture production exists, as in many of the African nations expected to be hardest hit by climate change, will have to invest in training and infrastructure.

More efficient farming

Effective, efficient mariculture operations also have the benefit of requiring only a small amount of space; according to the study, typically 3% or less of a country’s exclusive economic zone is required to meet consumer demand, according to the researchers’ calculations.

“The small space requirement for mariculture leaves ample room for careful planning to minimize impacts on other ocean industries,” said Steve Gaines, dean of the Bren School and a co-author on the paper. With careful coordination, mariculture operations can be set up so as not to compete with fisheries, coastal tourism and shipping, among other ocean industries.

In fact, its efficiency is one of mariculture’s key advantages: it has a lower greenhouse gas footprint and lower demands for water and land than many land-based sources of meat. And with improvements to finfish feed, breeding and husbandry, it is possible to further increase yield to meet consumer demand. According to the researchers, gearing food production toward the ocean could not only satisfy the growing global appetite for meat, it could also free up land required for terrestrial agriculture

“Shifts in consumer preferences away from terrestrial meat could reduce the environmental impacts of global food systems,” Froehlich said. With an increase in production, prices are expected to decrease, allowing access to local, sustainable and nutritious food.

Producing food from the ocean for future populations will no doubt take a global concerted effort. But nowhere is it more urgent than in tropical developing countries, places where climate-driven productivity loss, coupled with growing populations, put a great strain on food security.

“Tropical developing countries will endure the greatest losses in fisheries catches and may therefore be priorities for investments in ocean aquaculture expansion,” said Reniel Cabral, a senior lecturer at James Cook University and co-author on the study.

Research in this paper was also conducted by Erin O’Reilly at the Bren School; Elena Ojea at CIM-Universidade de Vigo; James E. Palardy at the Pew Charitable Trusts; Jorge García Molinos at Hokkaido University; Katherine J. Siegel at UC Berkeley; Ragnar Arnason at University of Iceland; Marie Antonette Juinio-Meñez at University of the Philippines; Katharina Fabricius at the Australian Institute of Marine Science; and Carol Turley at Plymouth Marine Laboratory.

(HARRISBURG, Pa. – April 22, 2022) Tomorrow, the Legislative Reference Bureau (LRB) will publish the final form rule (available to view online today) that promulgates Pennsylvania’s participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), after a multi-year and extensive public process. EDF has long advocated for Pennsylvania to take advantage of the proven, market-based program to drive down pollution and drive up investments in Pennsylvania that will help the commonwealth be a leader in the clean economy.

“As a state historically known for its fossil fuel production, Pennsylvania’s entry into RGGI marks a major milestone in the country’s shift toward a clean energy future. And it positions Pennsylvania to remain an energy production leader as the world and major businesses look to build the zero-carbon economy. Governor Wolf is to be applauded for his unwavering commitment to RGGI, a program that will meaningfully tackle climate change in the commonwealth and beyond, while also acting as an economic engine for good.

“Pennsylvanians understand that RGGI’s market-based mechanism supports the clean energy future they want, need, and know will bring about jobs and economic development that is sustainable in the long term, while providing investments that can lower electric bills. And they are ready for it. The scale of these transformational opportunities simply would not exist absent Pennsylvania’s participation in RGGI. Adoption of RGGI is also coming at a time of renewed focus on the need to act on climate and to get off the fossil fuel supply roller coaster that is harming Americans’ health, lives, and pocketbooks.

“Instead of obstructing progress and endangering Pennsylvania’s future, the Pennsylvania legislature should move on the RGGI Investments Act, a bill that will spur investment in transitioning energy communities and in environmental justice communities that have long sought support from state leaders.”

• Mandy Warner, Director, Climate and Clean Air Policy, Environmental Defense Fund

More background:

While the rule’s publication has been the subject of intense obstruction and delay tactics by opponents who would rather ignore climate change and the public’s support for action, a 2020 poll found that 72% of Pennsylvanians support the state’s participation in RGGI, with “broad support for RGGI’s improvement of air quality, health and climate change.”

Linking to RGGI will facilitate reductions in power sector carbon emissions while generating hundreds of millions of dollars annually in proceeds that can be deployed toward cleaner energy and energy efficiency as well as fairness for workers and communities experiencing the energy transition that is well underway.

Pennsylvania’s link to RGGI will allow it to participate in the program’s quarterly auction of emissions allowances and attendant proceeds slated for September 7.

(MINNEAPOLIS) Farmers across Minnesota now have access to detailed financial information about the profitability of cover crops — plants that are grown to build and maintain soil health between cash crops — through FINBIN, the largest publicly available farm financial database in the country. The change is a result of a collaboration between The University of Minnesota’s Center for Farm Financial Management, Minnesota State Farm Business Management, Southwest Minnesota Farm Business Management Association, Minnesota Office for Soil Health and Environmental Defense Fund.

Minnesota State FBM included initial findings from 17 farms growing cover crops in its annual report, Influence of intensified environmental practices on farm profitability, which was released this week and draws from the database. The preliminary data shows the seed cost, input costs and other expenses producers incurred growing a winter cover crop.

Over the coming years, the cover crop dataset will grow to include more than 85 farms across Minnesota and will enable farmers, farmer business partners and state policymakers to glean new insights about how cover crops impact yields and profitability.

“We’re excited to answer farmers’ economic questions about cover crops,” said Vincent Gauthier, senior analyst, Climate-Smart Agriculture at EDF. “This new and growing dataset will allow us to compare yields, expenses and profits between farms that grow cover crops and those that don’t.”

The information collected in the 2021 pilot year allowed farmers and FBM instructors to test out the new data collection process. The preliminary data showed that farmers spent $26 per acre on cover crop seed planted before corn and $20 per acre on cover crop seed planted before soybeans.

“Farmers need detailed financial information when considering the adoption of a new management practice, and cover crops are no different,” said Keith Olander, executive director of AgCentric and FBM. “The new enterprise data on cover crops will help farmers make informed financial decisions.”

The cover crop financial dataset will enhance a robust set of financial benchmarking data for environmental practices in the FINBIN database, which already includes comparisons of tillage practices and financial analysis of farms participating in the Minnesota Department of Agriculture’s Water Quality Certification Program.

“This new financial data on cover crops will provide critical detail for Minnesota farms to improve the profitability of implementing the practice,” said Brad Jordahl Redlin, Water Quality Certification Program manager at Minnesota Department of Agriculture. “Now in its third year, the overall report has already established that the environmental cohort of farms — those certified in the Minnesota Agricultural Water Quality Certification Program — has every year shown higher net income profit than the non-certified cohort.”

Download Influence of intensified environmental practices on farm profitability at agcentric.org/farm-business-management/annual-fbm-reports/, and explore the FINBIN database at finbin.umn.edu.

(Austin, TX) A new study published this week in the journal Nature Communications reveals that low-producing oil and gas wells are responsible for approximately half of the methane emitted from all well sites in the United States while accounting for only 6% of the nation’s oil and gas production.

The study examines methane emissions from wells that produce less than 15 barrels of oil equivalent a day and concludes these wells emit methane at a rate 6-12 times higher than the national average – allowing approximately 10% of their gas to leak directly into the atmosphere. That translates to roughly 4 million metric tons of methane emissions annually.

“The methane footprint of these small wells is enormous and can’t be ignored,” said Mark Omara, EDF scientist and lead author of the study. “Our research shows that the total methane emitted from the country’s half million low-producing wells has the same impact on the climate every year as 88 coal-fired power plants.”

Visual assets available here for download

Methane is a potent greenhouse gas responsible for over a quarter of current global warming, and the oil and gas sector is the nation’s largest industrial source of methane pollution. This study’s findings about the sheer volume of methane emitted by low-producing oil and gas wells carry both climate and energy security implications, as methane is not only a climate-forcing agent but also the main component of natural gas – an energy resource being wasted in significant quantities.

Despite making up 80%of the nation’s oil and gas wells, some industry lobbyists have called for these low-producing well sites (also called marginal wells) to be exempted from environmental standards. This research indicates that any policy aimed at significantly reducing methane emissions from the oil and gas sector must also apply to these pollution sources.

Last year the Environmental Protection Agency proposed new standards to reduce oil and gas methane emissions, but its current proposal omits many smaller well sites from regular monitoring. Meanwhile, policymakers in states including Colorado and New Mexico have already advanced pollution rules that help address the outsized emissions from low-producing wells, demonstrating that doing so is feasible and cost-effective. These states are setting a critical example for EPA to build on.

“This is a completely solvable problem. To protect communities, address climate change and meet our international commitments we must ensure rigorous pollution safeguards apply to these low-producing, high-polluting wells, which make up the vast majority of our oil and gas infrastructure,” said Rosalie Winn, Director and Senior Attorney at EDF. “The science clearly supports stronger EPA standards to reduce the outsized pollution from smaller wells, and the experience of states like Colorado and New Mexico shows how doable that is.”

According to the research, much of the emissions from marginal wells are the result of maintenance and mechanical issues and could be avoided with additional site inspections and oversight. Many of those fixes would also pay for themselves, as the gas these facilities emit into the atmosphere is valued at about $700 million a year at 2019 prices. In fact, these low-producing wells waste enough gas each year to meet the needs of over 3.6 million homes in the U.S., or enough to power every home in the state of Ohio.

“In addition to creating serious pollution problems for local communities, the massive waste of resources from these small wells represents a grave threat to U.S. energy security,” said Jon Goldstein, Senior Director Legal and Regulatory Affairs, EDF. “Companies cannot simultaneously tout the importance of these gas resources for energy security on the one hand while allowing them to leak into the atmosphere unchecked on the other.”

As Russia’s catastrophic invasion of Ukraine roils global energy markets and the U.S. and European Union commit to find solutions that support energy security, EDF estimates that gas saved from commonsense measures in the U.S. to reduce leaks, venting and flaring from oil and gas facilities would provide about half of the Biden administration’s commitment to Europe to replace Russian imports.

The research also finds that about three-quarters of marginal wells are owned by large companies who operate over a hundred different facilities each and have ample resources (average revenue of $335M in 2019) to avoid needless pollution.

Environmental Defense Fund, Fundación Colibrí y la compañía Genesis Solar dieron inicio hoy a la fase inicial de un proyecto piloto comunitario de energía solar y almacenamiento que brindará electricidad limpia, asequible y confiable a aproximadamente 40 familias en la isla municipio de Culebra en Puerto Rico.

El proyecto proporcionará independencia energética a los residentes de Culebra mediante la instalación de paneles solares y baterías en hogares de ingresos bajos y moderados antes de la temporada de huracanes, y apoyará la visión de la isla municipio de convertirse en una "isla resiliente". Se dará prioridad a los ancianos, familias con hijos y personas con necesidades especiales de salud, entre otras. El proyecto se convierte en realidad en momentos en que Puerto Rico enfrenta interrupciones eléctricas debido a la vulnerabilidad de la red eléctrica, así como retos que se presentan durante la época de huracanes comenzando el 1 de junio.

“Hoy hay un rayo de esperanza en Puerto Rico. Tras los innumerables apagones que hemos vivido desde la tragedia del huracán María, la pequeña y laboriosa isla municipio de Culebra implementa soluciones energéticas duraderas que podrán ser modelo de independencia energética para otras zonas en Puerto Rico.

“Los culebrenses son los verdaderos héroes hoy. Han liderado este proyecto, se han unido, han decidido tener una comunidad resiliente frente al cambio climático y promover la sostenibilidad.  Environmental Defense Fund se compromete a apoyarlos brindando energía confiable y resiliente a sus hogares.

“Proyectos de energía limpia como este, liderados por la comunidad, pueden impulsar la voluntad política para que Puerto Rico pueda cumplir con sus metas ambientales. Además, puede servir como modelo para otros países en el Caribe que se encuentran al frente de la lucha contra el cambio climático”.

• Agustín F. Carbó, Gerente Senior, Transición Energética

Environmental Defense Fund busca identificar soluciones energéticas efectivas y equitativas que puedan traer electricidad limpia y centrada a las comunidades de Puerto Rico, y puedan satisfacer las necesidades diarias de sus familias haciendo que isla sea más resiliente al cambio climático. Nuestro trabajo se centra en promover un proyecto de almacenamiento y energía solar impulsado por la comunidad en la isla de Culebra y en apoyar a una variedad de organizaciones que están impulsando un cambio sistémico en la red eléctrica de Puerto Rico. Abordamos este trabajo de manera holística, aprovechando nuestra experiencia técnica, herramientas de financiamiento sostenible y experiencia en reforma energética para ayudar a desarrollar soluciones a largo plazo para la crisis energética del territorio. Para obtener más información, visite: www.edf.org/PuertoRico.

(SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO) Environmental Defense Fund, Fundación Colibrí, and Genesis Solar break ground today on the initial phase of a community-based solar and storage pilot project that will bring clean, affordable and reliable electricity to approximately 40 households on the island municipality of Culebra in Puerto Rico.

The pilot aims to advance energy independence in Culebra by installing solar panels and batteries in low- and moderate- income households ahead of this year’s hurricane season and will support the island municipality’s vision to become a “resilient island.” Priority will be given to the elderly, families with children and those with health and other special needs. This comes after Puerto Rico experienced an island wide blackout - one of the major power disruptions after hurricanes Maria and Irma.

“Today brings a ray of hope to Puerto Rico. After the countless blackouts we’ve experienced since the tragedy of hurricane María, the small and industrious island municipality of Culebra is implementing long-lasting energy solutions that will be a model of energy independence for other areas in the territory.

“The residents of Culebra are the real heroes today. They have come together in unprecedented ways to launch a variety of energy initiatives and make their community resilient in the face of climate change. Environmental Defense Fund is committed to supporting them by bringing clean and resilient power to their homes.

“Community-led clean energy projects like this one can amass the political will and encourage the right policies, so Puerto Rico can meet its environmental goals. What’s more, it can serve as a model for communities throughout the Caribbean who are on the front-line of climate change.”

• Agustín F. Carbó, Senior Manager, Energy Transition

Environmental Defense Fund is developing an innovative project to demonstrate the feasibility of distributed energy resource systems for residences in Culebra that can reduce the island’s dependence on fossil fuels. These systems can maximize locally-generated renewable energy, such as solar power, and are run backed by battery storage and intelligent software. Linked to the larger grid — ensuring the delivery of affordable, clean, and reliable energy every day — they will be designed to also separate from the grid during emergencies, like Hurricane Maria. This will help to keep the lights on in residences that need it most. For more information, visit www.edf.org/PuertoRico.

(Washington, D.C. – April 19, 2022) The Biden administration has finished the first phase of its efforts to restore and strengthen America’s foundational environmental law.

The White House Council on Environmental Quality today unveiled its final guidelines for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), based on extensive public input. NEPA has been in effect for more than half a century, but the previous administration tried to severely weaken its protections.

“NEPA has been the foundation of our environmental laws since 1970. It ensures that the federal government carefully considers environmental impacts of industrial projects and that communities have a voice in what gets built in their neighborhood. Communities of color, especially, have relied on NEPA to make sure their voices are heard in decisions that have a profound impact on their health and their well-being,” said Rosalie Winn, senior attorney for Environmental Defense Fund. “Today’s action reestablishes essential NEPA safeguards and ensures they will continue to protect people and communities today and future generations. It’s a key step toward ensuring that the federal government is fully considering climate and environmental justice impacts for industrial projects and other decisions.”

NEPA requires federal agencies to consider the environmental effects of large industrial projects including oil and gas wells, coal mines, and other federal decisions. The previous administration tried to dramatically limit how the federal government assesses the environmental effects of its policies, including attempting to prevent agencies from considering climate impacts. That action was challenged in court by a coalition of environmental justice, outdoor recreation and conservation groups, including Environmental Defense Fund.

Today’s action by the Biden administration restores the full consideration of the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of federal actions under NEPA, once again requiring the government to assess impacts on climate change and environmental injustice. The rule also requires consideration of the public interest when assessing the purpose and need for federal action, and it removes barriers to more comprehensive analysis by individual agencies.

Today’s action finishes Phase 1 of the Biden administration’s review of the earlier changes to NEPA. The administration has also committed to continuing to review the last administration’s actions and to strengthen NEPA in Phase 2 of its review process.

“NEPA is a floor for environmental protections, not a ceiling,” said Winn. “We must take more steps to fully embed climate and environmental justice into all federal decision making. We look forward to the administration’s continuing work to strengthen NEPA and empower frontline communities.”

(Washington, D.C. – April 18, 2022) The U.S. Supreme Court today declined to hear an appeal (Spire v. Environmental Defense Fund, No. 21-848) of a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that overturned the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) approval of the 66-mile Spire STL pipeline in Illinois and Missouri. The D.C. Circuit’s June 2021 ruling in a case brought by Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) was crucial in enforcing FERC’s obligation to protect the public interest, including to protect ratepayers, landowners, and local communities from adverse impacts.

FERC has issued an ongoing emergency authorization for the pipeline while it publicly re-evaluates the pipeline in light of the D.C. Circuit ruling that its original approval process had significant legal deficiencies.

“A unanimous D.C. Circuit ruling found serious flaws in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission orders approving the Spire STL pipeline, including failing to assess the harms to ratepayers and landowners,” said Erin Murphy, senior attorney for Environmental Defense Fund, which is a party to the case. “Today’s Supreme Court decision means the D.C. Circuit decision to overturn approval of the pipeline will stand undisturbed, and FERC will continue to reassess the project while ensuring it is protecting ratepayers, landowners, and local communities. FERC has already issued ongoing emergency authorization of the pipeline while it re-evaluates its decision consistent with its responsibilities under the law.”

EDF filed suit in January 2020 over concerns that FERC approved the Spire STL pipeline without conducting a meaningful review. Under the Natural Gas Act, FERC must determine whether a pipeline is necessary and beneficial to the public before approving it, including evaluating the adverse impacts on ratepayers, landowners, and local communities. 

In June 2021, the D.C. Circuit ruled that there were serious deficiencies in FERC’s approval, that FERC “ignored record evidence of self-dealing” between the pipeline developer and its affiliate, and that FERC had failed to satisfy provisions in the Natural Gas Act meant to protect Spire customers. The court vacated the FERC orders approving the pipeline and remanded the matter to FERC for further proceedings. Spire STL and Spire Missouri — the pipeline developer and its affiliate company — asked the Supreme Court to review that judicial decision.

In October 2021, the Supreme Court declined Spire’s request to stay or halt the D.C. Circuit ruling. Spire filed a second stay request with the Supreme Court in December 2021 along with a petition for certiorari. Spire then withdrew that second stay request after FERC granted Spire STL an extended temporary certificate to operate the pipeline throughout the remand proceeding. The extension of the temporary certificate ensured continued service to St. Louis residents through the winter.

Spire’s petition for Supreme Court review did not challenge the D.C. Circuit court’s ruling on the merits that the original FERC orders were unlawful. It only sought review of the court’s remedy – its decision to vacate those orders. Today the Supreme Court declined that request.

(Washington, D.C. – April 14, 2022) Environmental Defense Fund has joined hundreds of Americans in urging EPA to limit pollution from freight trucks and buses. An EDF expert testified in support of EPA’s proposed standards for those heavy-duty vehicles, and also urged the agency to further strengthen the proposal to ensure substantial deployment of zero-emitting vehicles, as part of a three-day national public hearing.

“Deploying zero-emitting heavy-duty vehicles is critical to reach our health and climate goals. We urge EPA to move forward swiftly with standards that protect human health and the environment for all people and all communities,” said EDF legal fellow Andy Su in his testimony. He also called setting protective standards that reduce harmful diesel pollution and ensure greater deployment of zero-emitting vehicles “actions that will save money for truckers and fleets, strengthen our energy security, and help to support and grow jobs.”

The transportation sector is the largest source of climate pollution in the U.S. Medium and heavy-duty vehicles like delivery trucks and buses are less than ten percent of all the vehicles on our roads, but they are responsible for almost a quarter of all climate pollution and more than half of the smog-forming pollution from the transportation sector. That smog-forming pollution disproportionately harms low-income communities and communities of color. Freight trucks and buses also consume more than 55 billion gallons of fuel annually at a significant cost for truckers and fleets, especially in the face of recent price increases and supply uncertainties related to the volatile global landscape.  

EPA has proposed stronger pollution standards for new heavy-duty vehicles starting in 2027. The agency estimates that its most protective proposed standards would prevent up to 2,100 premature deaths and 18,000 cases of asthma in children, and would have benefits that outweigh its costs by billions of dollars. 

Su also testified that there is an overwhelming amount of data that supports the feasibility of significant near-term deployment of zero-emitting trucks and buses – vehicles that would substantially increase the health, air quality, and climate benefits EPA’s rule would deliver.

“Major manufacturers have made significant investments to transitioning to [zero-emitting] freight trucks and buses, and truck fleets across the country are making significant commitments to electric heavy-duty trucks,” Su testified. “A recent study by Roush for EDF found that by 2027, many electrified … trucks and school and transit buses will be less expensive on both a first cost and total cost of ownership basis compared to their internal combustion engine counterparts.”

EPA originally planned to hold two days of public hearings about its proposal, but it added a third day because so many people wanted to take part. The hearings will wrap up today.

You can read Su’s entire testimony here.

(SANTA FE, N.M.) This week New Mexico’s Environmental Improvement Board (EIB) preliminarily approved a nationally leading set of requirements that will curb oil and gas air and methane pollution.

Oil and gas operators in New Mexico emit over 1.1 million metric tons of methane annually alongside an additional 300,000 metric tons of smog-forming VOCs. Reducing this pollution is necessary to protect public health across the state and in key oil and gas producing counties with unhealthy air quality, including Eddy, Lea, and San Juan counties – all of which received failing grades for ozone pollution from the American Lung Association.

The rules will be implemented by the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED). Alongside standards finalized by the Oil Conservation Commission last year to end routine venting and flaring, these rules will also help stop unchecked waste of energy resources and increase energy security in light of the global energy crisis. New Mexico operators waste an estimated $275 million worth of natural gas every year through methane venting, flaring and leaks, which translates to approximately $45 million in foregone state revenue that could go to priorities like education.

The rules include key provisions given unanimous EIB approval such as comprehensive and frequent leak inspections at all wells and compressor stations as well as ensuring wells near homes and schools receive the most frequent inspections. These improvements have the support of a broad and diverse group of stakeholders including environmental, community and public health groups, NMED, the National Park Service and Oxy, the state’s second largest oil producer.

“The standards finalized today represent historic progress for the health and safety of communities across New Mexico. Gov. Lujan Grisham’s administration is showing the ambition needed to stop unchecked oil and gas pollution, increase energy security, protect public health and tackle the climate crisis. NMED’s rules, which address outsized emissions from smaller, leak-prone wells and protect those living closest to development with more frequent inspections to find and fix leaks, offer a powerful example for the EPA to build on as it advances nationwide methane protections.”

• Jon Goldstein, Senior Director, Regulatory & Legislative Affairs, Environmental Defense Fund

(Washington, DC – April 13, 2022) Today, a coalition of environmental organizations filed a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) because it has failed to enforce the Regional Haze Rule as required by the Clean Air Act. Thirty-four states have yet to submit plans to reduce air pollution in our country’s most iconic national parks and wilderness areas, and return natural visibility to these wild places. The EPA amended the Regional Haze Rule in 2017, giving states until July 31, 2021 to complete their plans, which means states and owners of major polluting facilities have had ample time to prepare for compliance. 

The organizations’ lawsuit urges the EPA to fulfill its obligation under the Clean Air Act, lock in retirement dates for coal plants, and require big polluters to reduce emissions to clear up haze and improve public health. Haze impacts 90 percent of our country’s national parks, and the same pollutants responsible for the widespread air pollution also harms public health, particularly in communities targeted by generations of systemic racism. Air pollution from burning fossil fuels and other sources worsens community health, drives up healthcare costs, and makes it harder for kids to learn and play and adults to work. 

The same sources of pollution harming our public lands and communities are also fueling the climate crisis, and the consequences are alarming. Climate change has increased the frequency and intensity of wildfires over natural levels across the western U.S., including at Yosemite and other national parks, raised sea level at the Statue of Liberty and other coastal parks, and is melting glaciers at Glacier Bay and Glacier.

The thirty-four states that have yet to submit a Regional Haze state implementation plan (SIP) include: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, DE, GA, HI, ID, IL, IA, KY, LA, ME, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NM, ND, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, UT, VT, VA, WV, WY. Sixteen states and Washington D.C. have submitted SIPs to EPA to-date.

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court and can be found here. The Center for Biological Diversity, Environmental Defense Fund, National Parks Conservation Association, and Sierra Club filed the lawsuit and are represented by Earthjustice. 

Statement from Stephanie Kodish, Senior Director and Counsel for National Parks Conservation Association’s (NPCA) Clean Air and Climate Programs: 

“Every day that EPA does not act to enforce the law, it puts the health of our national parks and communities at further risk. Facilities across the country are spewing pollution into our air, yet more than 30 states failed to provide plans to reduce this haze pollution and restore clean air at our national parks and beyond. Now, it’s up to EPA, the agency charged with protecting human health and the environment, to hold these states accountable to the law and ensure our national parks, rangers, visitors, wildlife and surrounding communities have clear skies and clean air to breathe. The future of our country’s national parks from Acadia to Yosemite are dependent on EPA action now.”

Statement from Holly Bender, Senior Director for Energy Campaigns at Sierra Club: 

“Coal burning power plants are the primary culprit for soot and smog pollution leading to hazy skies, and the thirty-four states that failed to submit pollution reduction plans at issue in this lawsuit are home to some of the biggest, most dangerous polluters in the country. From Pacificorps’ Hunter and Huntington plants in Utah, to TVA’s Shawnee plant in Kentucky, these coal plants and other fossil fuel facilities not only affect national parks and wilderness areas, they also harm the air we breathe in communities of color, which are disproportionately burdened by pollution. Administrator Regan must act to ensure the failure by these states to regulate pollution is not a windfall to utilities at the expense of public health and the necessary achievement of clean air on our public lands. Justice for communities impacted by soot and smog starts with the EPA enforcing the law.”

Statement from Graham McCahan, Senior Attorney for Environmental Defense Fund: 

“It’s critical that we reduce the pollution that causes haze so that we can protect the health of all Americans and the beauty of our national parks. There’s no time to waste.”

Statement from Nicole Horseherder, Executive Director of Tó Nizhóní Ání: 

“Our future is built through care for one another and the planet that sustains us. The Navajo Nation needs the EPA's Regional Haze Program to work as intended in order to limit air pollution traveling onto Navajo land. All living things are connected to one another and everyone has a right to a healthy and safe community.”

Statement from Elizabeth Loos, Executive Director of the Badlands Conservation Alliance: 

“North Dakota has some of the most egregious haze polluters in the nation, harming air quality in Theodore Roosevelt National Park and other treasured places in the Badlands. Sadly, we’ve noticed a pattern with the state regularly downplaying concerns, delaying action, and failing to require pollution controls to deliver us clean air. Routinely missing deadlines allows the dirtiest coal plants in North Dakota to continue polluting unchecked and EPA must hold them accountable.”

(April 13, 2022) The California Air Resources Board (CARB) just moved the state one step closer to eliminating pollution from new cars and passenger trucks by 2035 with its proposed new Advanced Clean Car II Standards yesterday evening.

“The proposed standards are one of the most consequential state actions ever taken to reduce climate pollution,” said EDF senior attorney Alice Henderson. “When adopted, these historic standards will reduce harmful air pollution and save thousands of lives, save Californians hard-earned money at the gas pump, strengthen domestic energy security, and create American jobs.”

CARB issued its Notice of Public Hearing to consider the Advanced Clean Car II proposal and Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons describing key elements of the proposal and the benefits it will deliver to Californians. The Advanced Clean Car II proposal includes protective limits on harmful air pollution and strengthened sales requirements for zero-emitting vehicles. The stronger sales requirements would ensure 68% of new cars and passenger trucks sold in California are zero-emitting by 2030 and would eliminate all tailpipe pollution from new vehicles by 2035. The proposal also includes provisions to help ensure the benefits of zero-emitting vehicles are equitably shared – provisions that must be strengthened to advance equity and support environmental justice.

California has estimated the standards will deliver billions of dollars of benefits to people in the state in the form of pollution reductions and avoided fuel costs. An EDF analysis similarly concluded that ensuring all new vehicles sold are zero-emitting by 2035 would prevent more than 7,400 premature deaths, eliminate more than 1.2 billion tons of climate pollution, and save Californians $194 billion in cumulative net benefits by 2050.

California’s proposal comes at a time when manufacturers are investing billions of dollars in zero-emitting vehicles, introducing new models, and growing U.S. manufacturing and jobs to produce these vehicles in states across the country. Last week, EDF released a market assessment by ERM capturing these key developments, the dynamic market, and the growing momentum toward a zero-emitting future.  

Over the past two years, CARB staff have conducted four virtual public workshops and a community listening session about the need for clean car standards, developed and refined various analyses, developed and released draft regulation text and completed a draft Standardized Regulatory Impact Assessment. CARB will consider the proposed Advanced Clean Car II standards at a hearing on June 9, with the expectation of a second hearing in August when it will vote on the proposal.  

(Washington, D.C. – April 12, 2022) Environmental Defense Fund and a broad coalition of other groups is calling on EPA to reaffirm its finding that it is appropriate and necessary to limit mercury and other toxic pollution from coal and oil-fired power plants. EPA has been accepting public comment on its proposal, which reinstates a robust legal basis for the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards – safeguards against extremely dangerous pollution including mercury, which causes brain damage in babies and is associated with heart disease, arsenic, and other toxic substances that cause cancer and lung disease.

Environmental Defense Fund joined Air Alliance Houston, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future, Clean Air Council, Clean Air Task Force, Clean Wisconsin, Conservation Law Foundation, Downwinders at Risk, Earthjustice, Environmental Integrity Project, Environmental Law & Policy Center, Natural Resources Council of Maine, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club and Southern Environmental Law Center to submit technical comments to EPA.

EDF is also part of a broad and far-reaching coalition of more than 80 community, public health, civil rights, environmental justice, environmental, faith and professional groups to submit a letter in “strong support” of EPA’s proposal. The letter was submitted yesterday by Moms Clean Air Force.

“Coal- and oil-burning power plants are among the largest sources of hazardous air pollution, including mercury, lead, arsenic, and acid gases,” the groups say in the letter. “Emissions of these pollutants seriously harm public health and the environment … The [Mercury and Air Toxics Standards have] been enormously successful: As the Proposal notes, it has contributed to reductions in mercury emissions from power plants of more than 85 percent.”

Since 2012, the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards have slashed pollution and have done it at a fraction of the expected cost. Recent studies prove that reducing toxic pollution has provided greater health benefits than anticipated, for less money. The previous administration tried to weaken the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards by attacking the appropriate and necessary finding. EPA’s proposal would reverse that wholly unfounded action and restore the finding.

You can read the entire community letter below:

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0794

Comments of Community, Public Health, Civil Rights, Environmental Justice, Environmental, Faith and Professional Organizations on National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units-Revocation of the 2020 Reconsideration, and Affirmation of the Appropriate and Necessary Supplemental Finding; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 87 Fed. Reg. 7624 (Feb. 9, 2022)

The undersigned organizations strongly support EPA’s Proposal to reaffirm its finding that it is appropriate and necessary to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) from coal- and oil-fired power plants under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, revoking the 2020 action in which EPA rescinded this finding. EPA should finalize its Proposal and should promptly propose, in a separate rulemaking, to strengthen the emissions standards for power plants in the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, 77 Fed. Reg. 9304 (Feb. 16, 2012) (“MATS”).

Coal- and oil-burning power plants are among the largest sources of hazardous air pollution, including mercury, lead, arsenic, and acid gases. They are also significant sources of benzene, formaldehyde, dioxins, polycyclic organic matter, and many other organic hazardous air pollutants. Emissions of these pollutants seriously harm public health and the environment. As a result of widespread mercury contamination, all fifty U.S. states warn residents against consumption of locally caught fish, yet nearly seven percent of all U.S. women of childbearing age—more than four million women—are still exposed to mercury at levels harmful for fetal brain development. Neurodevelopmental harm from mercury contamination in fish outweighs the significant nutritional benefits of eating fish. Emissions of lead likewise poison the developing fetus, while arsenic and benzene cause cancer. And air toxics from power plants are a component of particulate pollution that causes heart attacks and strokes on a wide scale, killing many thousands of people each year.

Power plants contribute to the pollution burdens borne by Black, Indigenous, and other communities of color, which already face disproportionately high levels of air pollution. Furthermore, some of these communities frequently consume self-caught fish at high per capita rates, increasing their exposure to methylmercury and other toxics. The communities most at risk from power plant HAP emissions are often socioeconomically disadvantaged. HAP emissions from power plants contribute to a range of serious environmental injustices—injustices that the Clean Air Act directs EPA to remedy.T

he MATS rule established the first-ever national limits on power plant hazardous air pollution and secured dramatic reductions in emissions of many of these pollutants. The rule has been enormously successful: As the Proposal notes, it has contributed to reductions in mercury emissions from power plants of more than 85 percent. The MATS rule has reduced emissions of many other hazardous pollutants as well. However, during the Trump administration, EPA needlessly and unlawfully put these life-saving protections at risk by revoking the finding that the MATS rule is “appropriate,” while unreasonably and unlawfully declining to strengthen the standards. Among other serious errors, the 2020 rule gave almost no weight to the core statutory objective of reducing emissions of hazardous air pollutants, and declined to fully explore the health impacts of failing to regulate these pollutants. President Biden’s January 20, 2021, Executive Order 13990, “Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis,” properly required EPA to reconsider those unlawful actions.

The Proposal correctly recognizes, in reaffirming EPA’s prior findings in 2000, 2012, and 2016, that regulation of HAP emissions from power plants is appropriate and necessary. EPA proposes to find that, after “weighing the risks posed by HAP emissions from EGUs against the costs of reducing that pollution in the industry and society as a whole, it is worthwhile (i.e., ‘appropriate’) to regulate those emissions to protect all Americans, and in particular the most vulnerable populations, from the inherent risks posed by exposure to HAP emitted by coal- and oil-fired EGUs.” 87 Fed. Reg. at 7628. We strongly agree with EPA that “[t]he information and data amassed over the decades of administrative analyses and rulemaking devoted to this topic overwhelmingly support the conclusion that the advantages of regulating HAP emissions from coal- and oil-fired EGUs outweigh the costs.” Id. at 7636. As the Proposal explains, “regulation of HAP emissions from EGUs under CAA Section 112 greatly improves public health for Americans by reducing the risks of premature mortality from heart attacks, cancer, and neurodevelopmental delays in children, and by helping to restore economically vital ecosystems used for recreational and commercial purposes.” Id. at 7637.

In the Proposal, EPA properly considers information obtained since earlier findings that demonstrates that the benefits of limiting HAP emissions are even greater than previously recognized (including, for example, new studies of the substantial risks that mercury from power plants poses to cardiovascular health).  And the Proposal properly recognizes that, due in part to improved pollution-control techniques, the costs to industry of controlling these pollutants are dramatically lower than EPA estimated more than a decade ago in developing MATS.  EPA is correct to give weight to all human health and environmental advantages of reducing HAPs from power plants, regardless of whether the advantages could be quantified or monetized – it is inconsistent with the statutory text and design to ignore HAP-reduction benefits merely because they have not been monetized.  In the Proposal, EPA correctly gives weight to benefits that it had not monetized, including reductions in neurodevelopmental and cardiovascular impacts beyond those previously monetized by EPA, and reductions in adverse ecosystem effects such as mercury-related impacts on wildlife and tourism.  EPA is correct to note that among these important nonmonetized benefits of regulation are reductions in “health risks in [environmental justice] subpopulations that face disproportionally high exposure to EGU HAP.” 87 Fed. Reg. at 7644. Similarly, the Proposal is correct to recognize “the statutory intent to protect even the most exposed member of the population from the harms attendant to exposure to HAP emissions.” Id. at 7634.

In conclusion, EPA should promptly finalize its Proposal and reaffirm the appropriate and necessary finding, thereby reinforcing the legal foundation for pollution limits that are crucial to protecting public health.  In addition, we applaud EPA’s commitment in the Proposal to conduct a thorough review of the prior administration’s decision not to strengthen the standards pursuant to the Residual Risk and Technology Review. Because of the enormous harms that hazardous air pollutants from power plants continue to cause, and in light of the improvements in emissions control techniques since MATS was issued more than a decade ago, EPA should move promptly to strengthen these vital standards.

Respectfully submitted,

ACES 4 Youth

Air Alliance Houston

Accelerate Neighborhood Climate Action

Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments

Businesses for a Livable Climate

Call to Action Colorado

Capital Assets Energy, LLC

Capitol Heights Presbyterian

CatholicNetwork US

Chesapeake Bay Foundation

Children’s Environmental Health Network

Clean Air Council

Climate Reality Chicago Metro Chapter

Chispa Texas

Clean Energy Alliance of Naperville

Climate + Energy Project

CO Businesses for a Livable Climate

Community for Sustainable Energy

Denver DSA

Downwinders at Risk

Earthjustice

Eco-Justice Collaborative

Ecology Center

Elders Climate Action

Environmental Community Advocates of Galena Park

Environmental Defense Fund

Environmental Integrity Project

Evergreen Action

Faith Coalition for the Common Good

Faith in Place

First Focus on Children

Greater Highland Area Concerned Citizens

Greater New Orleans Housing Alliance

GreenLatinos

Groundwork Northeast Revitalization Group

Hispanic Access Foundation

I-70 Citizens Advisory Group

Iowa Environmental Council

Illinois Environmental Council

Indivisible Ambassadors

Ingleside on the Bay Coastal Watch Association

Interfaith Power & Light

Iowa Environmental Council

Justice and Mission Team, Illinois South Conference, United Church of Christ

League of Conservation Voters

Littleton Business Alliance

March of Dimes

Mayfair Park Neighborhood Association Board

Mental Health & Inclusion Ministries

Michigan Clinicians for Climate Action

Moms Clean Air Force

Montbello Neighborhood Improvement Association

Mothers Out Front Colorado

Mothers Out Front Kansas City Chapter

National Hispanic Medical Association

National Wildlife Federation

Natural Resources Defense Council

North Range Concerned Citizens

Prof. Scott Denning from Colorado State University 

Public Citizen

Rabbi Eliot Baskin

RapidShift Network

Respiratory Health Association 

Rosanna Gabaldon, Arizona State Senator

Save EPA (former employees)

Small Business Alliance

South Bronx Unite

South Texas Human Rights Center

Southwest Organization for Sustainability

Spirit of the Sun, Inc.

Sunnyside Community Redevelopment Organization

System Change Not Climate Change

Texas Campaign for the Environment

The Green House Connection Center

Union of Concerned Scientists

Unite North Metro Denver

Wall of Women

WE ACT for Environmental Justice

Western Slope Businesses for a Livable Climate

Wildwerding Consulting

Womxn from the Mountain

Working for Racial Equity