Complete list of press releases

(Washington, D.C.- July 14, 2020) Yesterday the House Appropriations Committee voted to advance its FY2021 Energy and Water appropriations proposal. This bill provides robust levels of funding for DOE’s clean energy, vehicles and science programs and includes emergency funding to modernize our energy system and electric grid.

“We commend Chairwoman Lowey, Subcommittee Chairwoman Kaptur and House Appropriations Committee members for standing up for the over 620,000 clean energy workers who have been laid off since March by proposing strong funding for clean energy and clean transportation programs. This bill sends an important signal that our country is focused on the clean energy sector, which has a huge potential in helping our economy recover - especially since it was growing 70% faster than the economy as a whole before the pandemic started.

“This bill demonstrates we can and must work to rebuild a better future that is cleaner, healthier and safer, even as we continue to focus on addressing the immediate health crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, by including new funding for a DOE pilot program to increase deployment of clean, electric school buses, we can support jobs while letting our children breathe easier and building the clean energy future they deserve.

“This year’s House Energy and Water bill also makes important and significant investments for water conservation. It will implement the landmark Drought Contingency Plan across the Colorado River Basin to conserve surface water and groundwater, and it also supports the Bureau of Reclamation’s Drought Response Program to build needed resilience to droughts that are getting more extreme as a result of climate change.”

• Elizabeth Gore, Senior Vice President, Political Affairs

Key provisions in the FY2021 Energy/Water Appropriations bill include:

• Funding increases to DOE Clean Energy & Science Programs & including billions in emergency funding to modernize the energy systems and the electric grid. These include:

· $2.85 billion for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, an increase of $58 million above the FY 2020 level and $2.1 billion above the request.

· $7.05 billion to DOE’s Office of Science, an increase of $50 million above the FY 2020 level and $1.2 billion above the request.

· $435 million for ARPA-E, an increase of $10 million above the FY 2020 level and rejects the President’s proposal to eliminate the program.

· Rejects the President’s proposal to eliminate DOE’s Loan Guarantee Programs and includes funding consistent with the FY 2020 levels.

• $40 Million for Direct Air Capture (DAC) R&D

• No less than $40 million for electric drive R&D, including electrification technologies, in the DOE Vehicles Technologies Program.

• At least $10 Million for an EV school bus pilot program at the Department of Energy

• To support the economic recovery from the coronavirus pandemic, the bill provides an additional $23.5 billion in emergency funding for DOE to modernize energy infrastructure, including:

• $7.78 billion to deploy energy efficient and clean energy infrastructure throughout the country and ensure that low-income households across the country have energy-efficient, more livable homes.

• $3.35 billion to enhance the resilience, reliability, and security of electric grid infrastructure.

• $1.25 billion to build demonstrations in negative emissions technologies and carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technologies and improve infrastructure at national laboratories.

• $250 million in demonstrations of transformational energy technologies through ARPA-E

• $40 Million Funding for the Drought Contingency Plan. Last year, Congress worked with EDF, coalition partners, states and others and overwhelmingly passed the Colorado River Drought Contingency Plan Authorization Act to help the seven Western states of the Colorado River Basin address increased occurrences of drought driven by climate change

• $5 Million for Bureau of Reclamation’s Drought Response Program.
  
   
• $60 Million for the WaterSMART Program.
  
   
• $67 Million for Water Reclamation and Reuse Program.

(Washington, D.C. – July 14, 2020) The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today told the Trump EPA that it cannot refuse the state of New York’s request for help with dangerous, and often deadly, cross-state air pollution.

A three-judge panel ordered that EPA’s denial of New York’s petition for help be vacated and that EPA reconsider its decision.

“Today’s decision will help protect the lives and health of millions of New Yorkers who are threatened by the smog that blows across state lines,” said EDF attorney Liana James. “The Good Neighbor provisions of the Clean Air Act exist so that downwind states don’t have to struggle with dangerous pollution alone. Today the court reinforced that fundamental ideal and ordered EPA to do its job.”

Smog is linked to premature deaths, asthma attacks and long-term lung damage. States that are working to reduce smog are often undermined by the dirtier air that blows across their borders from coal plants and other sources in upwind states. A recent study found that, in most states, about half the premature deaths caused by poor air quality are linked to pollution that blows in from other states. In New York, almost two-thirds of those premature deaths are due to cross-state air pollution.

The Clean Air Act obligates EPA to safeguard downwind states against smog-forming pollution from coal-fired power plants and other sources in upwind states, under what are known as the Good Neighbor provisions. In March of 2018, New York asked EPA for help with pollution from hundreds of sources in nine upwind states: Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. EPA denied the state’s petition.

New York, the city of New York, and New Jersey then sued EPA for failing to protect millions of New Yorkers from smog-forming pollution from upwind coal smokestacks, industrial facilities, and oil and gas activities in neighboring states. EDF, the Adirondack Council, and Sierra Club were parties to the case in support of the states.

Today the D.C. Circuit ruled that “EPA offered insufficient reasoning for the convoluted and seemingly unworkable showing it demanded of New York’s petition … EPA’s test, at best, was a moving target and, at worst, demanded likely unattainable standards of proof.” (Decision, pages 3 and 13) The court declined to set a final deadline but ordered that “we fully expect the EPA to act promptly on remand.” (Decision, page 23)

(BOSTON) States representing about one-third of the U.S. truck sales just agreed to the largest cross-state collaborative for deployment of zero-emission trucks and buses. Under the agreement, fifteen states and the District of Columbia will develop plans that could decarbonize their trucking industries to improve air quality and reduce greenhouse gases.

“Pollution from heavy diesel trucks causes serious health problems for people nationwide. Investing in zero-emission trucking is the key to solving this problem. Americans living with these impacts are literally sick of waiting. It’s times for fleets, manufacturers and states to embrace ambitious plans for the adoption of electric vehicles.”

• Jason Mathers, Director, Vehicles and Freight Strategy

This initiative has the potential to ignite the market for clean transportation by accelerating demand for electric trucks and buses. EDF urges the states to adopt action plans that transition 100% of new trucks and buses to zero-emission models by 2040 – a goal that would cut pollution, create jobs and address environmental injustices.

Medium- and heavy-duty trucks are a major source of air pollution, often concentrated near freight corridors located in disadvantaged communities.

California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington, as well as D.C., signed the agreement entitled Multi-State Medium- and Heavy-Duty Zero Emission Vehicle.

(Washington, D.C. – July 13, 2020) The Trump administration has proposed to maintain outdated national pollution limits for smog – the latest in a long string of decisions that put Americans’ health at risk.

The Trump EPA today proposed keeping our current National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ground-level ozone, commonly called smog – in spite of a large body of medical and scientific evidence showing our current level does not adequately protect public health.

“Tens of millions of Americans already live in an area with unhealthy levels of ground-level ozone pollution. By law, EPA must ensure that our national standards are set at a level that protects public health – including a margin of safety for particularly impacted groups,” said EDF senior attorney Rachel Fullmer. “EPA’s proposal to maintain the current standard particularly harms vulnerable populations who are more susceptible to air pollution, including children, the elderly, anyone working outdoors, and people with asthma or other heart and lung diseases. EPA even acknowledges that its proposal would disproportionately harm Black communities and low-income communities that have higher rates of childhood asthma and other chronic diseases.”

Ground-level ozone is a pollutant that is a main component of smog. More than 137 million Americans live in an area with unhealthy levels of ground-level ozone pollution.

Smog irritates the lungs, exacerbates lung conditions like asthma, and is linked to a wide-array of serious heart and lung diseases, as well as to premature death. Extreme heat, which is increasingly common because of climate change, makes smog levels worse.

Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is required to reconsider our National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ground-level ozone every five years. The law requires EPA to set the standards at a level “requisite to protect the public health,” with “an adequate margin of safety” to prevent any known or anticipated health-related effects from polluted air. It also requires that the standards protect vulnerable populations – like children, the elderly, and people with heart and lung diseases – as well as the general public.

The National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ground-level ozone were last updated in 2015, to 70 parts per billion. Even then there was strong evidence that level was too low to adequately protect Americans from smog.

EDF and other experts urged EPA to set a lower and more health-protective standard. But today, the Trump EPA proposed leaving the inadequate standard in place.

Today’s proposal follows the Trump EPA’s refusal in April to strengthen another outdated air pollution standard – for particle pollution, commonly called soot.

Today’s proposal follows a rushed timetable set by then-EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. The review process was done without an expert panel to ensure scientific review, and it left insufficient time for adequate review and public participation. Likewise, the proposal only allows for a 45-day public comment period before finalization, half the 90-day comment period provided for the last review of our ground-level ozone standards.

(Washington, D.C. – July 10, 2020) The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today upheld a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission order that will help protect the climate, clean air and public health, and will have a vital impact on clean energy jobs for America’s future.

Opponents had argued that FERC’s Order 841 – an order that permits energy storage to compete fairly in wholesale power markets – interfered with states’ rights under the Federal Power Act. But a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit unanimously ruled that “[w]e find no foul here.”

“Today’s decision is a big step towards realizing cleaner, healthier air for all Americans and creating opportunities for more clean energy jobs,” said Michael Panfil, an attorney for EDF, which was a party to the case. “FERC’s order 841 creates an even playing field for energy storage to compete with traditional fossil fuel generators. It removes market barriers for energy storage and unlocks its enormous public health, environmental and cost-saving potential.”

FERC’s Order 841 was initially crafted under the Obama administration. It “remove[s] barriers to the participation of electric storage resources” in wholesale power markets. The order could catalyze energy storage deployment by up to 50 gigawatts, according to expert analysis. The order unlocks critical benefits from such deployment while carefully respecting longstanding state authority to craft climate, clean air and clean energy policy.

Opponents, including an association of traditional utility companies and NARUC, sued to block the rule. EDF intervened in the case in support of FERC’s order, along with NRDC and VoteSolar, who were both represented by EarthJustice.

A coalition of clean energy trade associations including the Energy Storage Association, the Solar Energy Industries Association, and the Advanced Energy Economy, also intervened in the case in support of FERC Order 841.

A coalition of state Attorneys General from Rhode Island, California, Massachusetts, Michigan and the District of Columbia filed amicus briefs in support of the order, as did a coalition of innovative tech companies including Sunrun, Tesla, Vivint Solar Developer, and ENGIE Storage Services.

The case was heard by Judges Rogers, Garland and Wilkins, who today unanimously upheld Order 841, saying:

“[FERC] specifically considered the benefits of enabling broad ESR participation to promoting just and reasonable wholesale rates. For example, [FERC] explained that promoting more participation of ESRs in wholesale markets increases competition, likely causing prices to lower, and more diversity in the types of ESRs encourages participation models that will be untethered to specific storage technologies … States remain equipped with every tool they possessed prior to Order No. 841 to manage their facilities and systems.”

(Washington, D.C.- July 9, 2020) Tomorrow the House Appropriations Committee will vote on its FY 2021 Interior-Environment appropriations proposal, a bill that builds on the strong funding levels enacted for EPA in FY2020 by increasing support for many core agency programs such as science and enforcement, and includes emergency funding for replacing lead water pipes. The bill also blocks taxpayer dollars for being used to attack public health and the environment by directing EPA to continue regulating Mercury and Air Toxic Standards (MATS) and by prohibiting use of funds for oil and gas methane pollution rollbacks.

“We commend Chairwoman Lowey, Subcommittee Chair McCollum and House Appropriations Committee members for their strong efforts to protect our communities from toxic pollution and climate change, and ensure all Americans can have access to clean air and clean water. We are pleased to see increased funding for core programs that provide vital science and tools for the EPA to make sound decisions related to preventing, regulating and abating hazardous pollution. With this bill, Congress has once again rejected the Trump administration’s cruel attempts to enact deep cuts to the EPA. The result of this budget will be fewer asthma attacks and more lives saved. We are glad to see that in the middle of a public health crisis, our leaders are rightly focused on protecting our families.

“We are also glad to see this bill provides a needed focus on helping low-income communities and communities of color through additional emergency funding to replace lead water pipes, increased funding for EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice and more funding for enforcement of polluting facilities, which are often located in these communities.

“The Trump EPA’s attacks on MATS, a program which is working to protect our children from poisonous mercury pollution and saves up to 11,000 lives every year, are disgraceful. Methane pollution is a key driver of climate change, and its release from the oil and gas industry is harmful and also unnecessary since mitigation is cost-effective, yet the Trump EPA has proposed to gut these standards as well. We are glad to see Congressional leaders forcefully denounce these rollbacks and stand up for American families by blocking their implementation.”

• Elizabeth Gore, Senior Vice President, Political Affairs

Key provisions in the FY2021 EPA/Interior Appropriations bill include:

• $3.58 billion for EPA’s core science and environmental program work, an increase of $210 million above the FY 2020 enacted level and $822 million above the President’s budget request.
   
• $4.36 billion for State and Tribal Assistance Grants, an increase of $119 million above the FY 2020 enacted level and $1.52 billion above the President’s budget request.

• $575 million for compliance monitoring and enforcement activities, an increase of $46 million above the FY 2020 enacted level and $59 million above the President’s request.
   
• $15 million for the EPA Office of Environmental Justice, an increase of $4.8 million, or 47 percent, above the 2020 enacted level more than five times above the President’s budget request.
   
• $500 million in emergency funding to replace lead pipes

• $90 million for Diesel Emissions Reduction grants, an increase of $3 million above the FY 2020 enacted level and $80 million above the President’s budget request.
   
• A provision directing EPA to continue regulating EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxic Standards (MATS), and overturn its decision to remove the “appropriate and necessary” finding. Includes Report Language directing EPA to assess the public health benefits, environment and compliance cost of the existing MATS rule, and compare those benefits to those if MATS were invalidated.

• A provision banning any federal funds from being used to finalize the rollback of EPA’s oil and gas methane pollution standards.

(Washington, D.C. – July 9, 2020) Today, Representative Diana DeGette, introduced the Clean Energy Innovation and Deployment Act of 2020 to help reduce climate pollution and protect Americans from the threat of climate change.”Cleaning up the way we produce electricity is critical to achieving our national climate change goals. It is especially important that we make large and rapid cuts in emissions from the power sector since clean technologies like solar and wind are already cost competitive today in most areas. With this new legislation, Congresswoman DeGette is adding a thoughtful proposal to the search for climate solutions.

“EDF looks forward to working with Congresswoman DeGette and all members of Congress to advance strong climate policy. We need to target emissions across the economy, and rapidly transforming the power sector to 100% clean electricity is a vital step that also eliminates one of the largest sources of unhealthy air pollution. We hope this bill and any other serious proposals will encourage members on both sides of the aisle to provide the kind of leadership on climate change and clean air that all Americans need.”

• Elizabeth Gore, Senior Vice President, Political Affairs

Background

The Clean Energy Innovation and Deployment Act of 2020 would establish a federal program to promote innovation and deployment of clean electricity to achieve 100% zero-emission electricity no later than 2050. Under this plan, every company that sells retail electricity would be required to increase the amount of clean energy provided to its customers. The bill also includes incentives for retail electricity providers to take early action to transition to 100% zero-emitting electricity before 2050 and to address emissions “upstream” from the power plant, meaning the greenhouse gas emissions in the extraction, processing and transport of coal, natural gas and oil used to generate electricity. ­­­­

The United States will need dramatic reductions in climate pollution across all sectors of the economy, including transportation and industry as well as electricity in order to avoid the worst impacts of a changing climate.

(HARRISBURG, Pa. – July 8, 2020) Today, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives voted in favor of House Bill (H.B.) 2025, which seeks to block the state’s ability to place limits on harmful carbon dioxide emissions from industrial and other sources. Pennsylvania is the third largest greenhouse gas (GHG) polluting state and is home to the fifth dirtiest power sector in the nation. A declining limit on power sector carbon emissions is critical to achieving the climate goals laid out by Gov. Tom Wolf in his January 8, 2019 executive order.

Gov. Wolf is charting a course to link Pennsylvania to the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) pursuant to the authority granted to him by the state legislature under the state Air Pollution Control Act (APCA). Previously, the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has acted under the APCA to regulate GHG emissions. A 2019 poll found that 79% of Pennsylvanians support a proposal to zero out carbon pollution from power plants, with Pennsylvanians overall preferring lawmakers who support strong action to combat climate change. The support for carbon limits is bipartisan and holds true across city, suburban and rural populations.

“At a time when Pennsylvanians need a solution to the public health and climate crises we face, the Pennsylvania House has chosen obstruction. H.B. 2025 offers no blueprint to clean our air, create the jobs of the future or tackle climate change – all at the expense of the health and economic opportunity of Pennsylvanians as a whole.

“In choosing to link to the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), Gov. Wolf is offering a road map for Pennsylvania’s energy and climate future. RGGI will catalyze economic development through investments in infrastructure, renewable energy and energy efficiency that will prove especially meaningful to low-income communities where consumers could save money on electric bills. A just-released DEP analysis indicates that ‘participating in RGGI will lead to a net increase of more than 27,000 jobs and add $1.9 billion to the Gross State Product in Pennsylvania.’ Legislators have the opportunity to constructively engage on RGGI, a program which can be used to make smart investments to support workers and communities impacted by fossil fuel plant closures and Environmental Justice communities that have borne the devastating impacts of pollution for far too long.

“To the members of the Pennsylvania House, we respectfully ask: Where is your solution? It’s clear the residents of the commonwealth have waited long enough and strongly support leadership on climate change. We urge the Pennsylvania Senate to reject this obstructionist bill.”

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

The international shipping industry will fail to tackle their global greenhouse gas emissions unless they put in place rules that truly reflect the climate impact of shipping fuels, according to a report released by Environmental Defense Fund and University Maritime Advisory Services today. As the International Maritime Organization meets for informal discussions on greenhouse gases this week, this report explores whether the processes for delivering rules for sustainable marine fuels can be sped up using lessons learnt from aviation, a sector facing similar challenges in transitioning to sustainable alternative fuels.

Shipping is the life blood of the global economy. The international maritime sector transports roughly 90% of world trade and emits more CO2 than all but five countries. Without urgent climate action, these emissions are set to at least double by 2050. The world’s countries have committed within UN’s International Maritime Organization (IMO) to reducing GHG emissions by at least 50% by 2050, and acknowledge that to meet this target the sector must make the switch from fossil fuels to alternative fuels to deliver on this ambition. Previous studies have shown that zero emission vessels need to enter the fleet at scale from as early as 2030.

The report considers how Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAF) or Eligible Fuels elements of the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO’s) market-based climate program, the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA), could be adopted in the context of shipping. The analysis shows that ICAO’s SAF framework offers a solid blueprint for the shipping sector. The report also identifies areas where the IMO should be more ambitious than ICAO to ensure that shipping transitions away from fossil fuels.

“The International Maritime Organization and the shipping industry need to put in place the right rules for alternative fuels to truly drive the decarbonisation of the sector and it does not need to start from scratch. The rules recently adopted by ICAO offer valuable lessons and a good starting place for the IMO to chart its course toward a genuinely sustainable shipping sector,” said Aoife O’Leary, Director with the Environmental Defense Fund.

This report’s key recommendations include:

• In the absence of robust accounting rules, the climate benefit of alternative fuels can be completely undermined. Shipping must adopt a full lifecycle perspective, accounting for all greenhouse gas emissions, including methane, and ensure accurate calculations of both the direct and indirect impacts of emissions associated with the whole supply chain (extraction/production, transport/distribution and combustion) of the fuel. It is a complex task, but ICAO has successfully done it for aviation and the IMO can use this work to jump-start its own progress.  
• Careful rules must be applied to ensure that the use of biofuels has a real climate benefit. Shipping must ensure that biofuels are not automatically granted a zero-emission status. The CORSIA framework sets out explicit rules for calculating emissions reductions for each biofuel pathway. It does not automatically allow all biofuels to claim zero carbon combustion emissions (as some other emissions accounting systems have done), as their lifecycle emissions can in some cases approach or even exceed those of petroleum fuels.

The report warns the IMO not to create perverse incentives which could promote fuels that could worsen the climate crisis.

“Using the most appropriate science is key to making the right decisions for our environment. Shipping, as aviation, should ensure that all the emissions from a fuel - from the production to the distribution to the combustion itself - are accounted for if we are to understand the real climate impact. A meaningful policy must incentivise a fair, sustainable and non-perverse shift away from fossil and avoid the risk that emissions are simply shifted elsewhere. Getting this right is mission critical to the shipping industry’s decarbonisation pathway,” said Dr Nishatabbas Rehmatulla, Senior Researcher, UCL and Principal Consultant, UMAS.

The authors also call on the IMO to:

• Adopt strict rules on transparency to ensure that shipping companies accurately report their emissions, and don’t double count emission reductions. 
• Allocate adequate resources and draw on the experience and lessons learned from ICAO, where appropriate, to get these rules right.

Download the report.
 

(Washington, D.C. – July 6, 2020) The Trump administration must stop stalling on protecting Americans from dangerous methane pollution from existing oil and gas sources, according to a motion filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by 16 states and cities and the Environmental Defense Fund.

“For almost four years now, Trump’s EPA has been shirking its duty to protect people from one of our most dangerous types of climate pollution, without offering any legitimate reason why,” said EDF senior attorney Rosalie Winn. “The science supporting the need for urgent action has become even more compelling in that time, cost-effective solutions are at hand, and everyone from states to major oil and gas producers recognize the importance of EPA standards for existing oil and gas sources. EPA must act now to protect the public from methane pollution.”

The filing includes the major oil and gas producing states of California, New Mexico, and Pennsylvania, as well as the states of New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington, the District of Columbia, the city of Chicago, and EDF.

Existing oil and gas sources are the largest industrial emitter of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas that is responsible for a quarter of the climate change we are experiencing today. The Clean Air Act requires EPA to regulate methane from both new and existing sources.

In 2016, EPA set a course to “swiftly” develop safeguards for methane from existing oil and gas sources – but since then the Trump administration has reversed course and, by its own admission, taken no steps to put in place protections to reduce methane from existing sources.

EDF and the states’ filing asks the court to find that EPA has unreasonably delayed fulfilling its obligation to establish methane standards for existing sources and to set a schedule requiring the agency to move forward swiftly.

In support of their filing, the coalition submitted detailed declarations by EDF experts analyzing substantial pollution and health harms due to EPA’s delay.

For instance:

• EPA’s delay in adopting existing source standards has allowed more than three million metric tons of methane pollution that would otherwise have been captured to escape into the atmosphere each year.
• This methane pollution is emitted alongside harmful smog-forming and hazardous air pollution like benzene, which disproportionately impacts communities living close to the existing oil and gas sources.
• The expert analysis finds that roughly 9.3 million people in the United States – including 600,000 children under the age of five, 1.4 million people over the age of 65, 1.4 million people living below the poverty line, and almost 2.8. million people of color – live within half a mile of an existing well and are exposed to harmful local air pollution in the absence of existing source standards.

The filing also describes the widely available and cost effective solutions to reduce methane pollution and the existing state standards that further support the feasibility of swift EPA action.

Notwithstanding this compelling body of evidence, the Trump EPA has ignored its obligation to set standards for existing sources and instead focused on rolling back safeguards against methane from new oil and gas sources – a move that would only exacerbate the pollution and health harms associated with its delay of standards for existing sources.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(WASHINGTON, DC – July 1, 2020) Today the House of Representatives voted to pass a major job-creating, national infrastructure bill that includes significant investments in clean energy and clean transportation, as well as programs to protect communities from climate impacts, replace lead service lines, put workers in our nation’s oil and gas fields back on the job cutting pollution, and much more.

“At a time when millions are still out of work, the Moving Forward Act presents a transformative plan to invest in clean transportation, clean energy and stronger, more resilient communities that will spur job growth immediately while creating the healthier future we need. By passing this bill, the House of Representatives today voted to rebuild better and help America recover from the economic damage caused by COVID-19.

“Especially with the addition of an important amendment passed with bipartisan support to invest in lead water line replacement - prioritizing low-income and environmental justice communities - this bill helps to address longstanding public health threats.

“Today’s vote and this week’s release of policy recommendations from the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis add to growing momentum for Congress to enact practical solutions that create jobs and a safer climate for our children.

• Elizabeth Gore, Senior Vice President, Political Affairs

Read our blog for specifics on provisions in the Moving Forward Act that pave the way for prosperous communities and a safer climate.

(July 1, 2020) EDF joined other health and environmental organizations, conservation advocates, and scientists at a virtual hearing today to oppose the Trump EPA’s efforts to distort cost-benefit assessments for vital public health and environmental rules.

EPA proposed the change just last month. It “could skew analyses of everything from health-based air quality standards, to emission standards for vehicles and large industrial facilities, to chemical disaster prevention safeguards,” said EDF senior attorney Ben Levitan, who testified at today’s hearing.

The proposal could lead to EPA selectively ignoring certain benefits of reduced air pollution when making decisions about vital clean air safeguards. EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler told reporters that weighing those benefits is the equivalent of a “shell game.” Levitan strenuously disagreed in his testimony today.

“What Wheeler dismissed as a ‘shell game’ includes the prevention of up to 11,000 premature deaths — and the avoidance of other health harms, including 130,000 asthma attacks — every year. Characterizing these co-benefits as some sort of accounting trick ignores their real, vital impacts for families and communities across America,” said Levitan. “It’s especially troubling that the proposal appears to arbitrarily, and unlawfully, accord greater weight to costs than benefits, further eroding the statutory rights of those the Clean Air Act was designed to protect.”

Levitan also pointed out that EPA failed to evaluate the environmental justice impacts of the proposal on communities of color and low-income communities, in direct violation of an executive order that has been in place since 1994.

The 36-member Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) today unilaterally changed the rules for the first three years of the agency’s flagship climate program, the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA). The Council decided to change the baseline to 2019 levels, in effect suspending airlines’ obligations to offset a portion of their carbon pollution if emissions do not rise above those levels during that time.

“The coronavirus pandemic has caused pain and loss around the world – for families, for communities and for working people. Airlines have been hit hard. One effect of the decrease in air travel is that carbon emissions from aviation have declined sharply. And now the industry is at an inflection point.

“As airlines scramble to recover from the COVID-19 crisis, they can’t afford to ignore the looming global crisis of climate change. Real leadership means setting the aviation sector on a path toward net zero climate impacts as swiftly as possible. The sooner that the costs of carbon control are included in the costs of doing business, the sooner new technologies will be developed.

“Instead, ICAO’s Council decided to backtrack on its commitment to ‘carbon neutral growth from 2020,’ so that airlines need only offset emissions above 2019 levels for the first three years of the program. If emissions do not rise above 2019 levels, airlines are wholly excused from offset obligations.

“Changing baselines is a bad precedent for the development of carbon markets in other countries and sectors. Ironically, it means that airlines will lose the first-mover advantage they had sought to secure through CORSIA, as other carbon market actors will beat them to the punch on long-term supply contracts.

“With offset obligations likely suspended for the pilot phase, today’s decision leaves the field wide open for governments – at local, state and national levels – to require airlines to integrate climate action into their economic recovery. That could, in turn, leave the industry with the very patchwork of regulations it fears.

“That the Council decided to arrogate to itself the authority to make this rule change, without consulting the full 190+ ICAO Member States that adopted CORSIA to begin with, sets a troubling precedent for the legitimacy of future decision-making by the UN’s aviation body.

“Today’s Council decision does not alter ICAO’s standards for carbon credits, including its March decision on credit eligibility, or its rules for sustainable aviation fuels. These standards are important precedents for the Paris Agreement and emerging legislation. As airlines try to woo back customers concerned about both COVID-19 and carbon pollution, civil society will hold airlines accountable to the CORSIA standards for fuels and carbon credits.”

• Annie Petsonk, International Counsel

BACKGROUND

The rules established for CORSIA in 2016 by ICAO’s 190+ country General Assembly required airlines, starting in 2021, to offset emissions of international flights above a baseline set at the average of 2019-2020 emissions. The International Air Transport Association (IATA) had asked the ICAO Council to change the rules so airlines would only have to offset when their pollution levels rise above 2019 levels, citing the unexpected slump in aviation emissions in 2020 due to COVID-19, and the greater carbon offset requirements that could result from the industry’s recovery.

Prior to the Council’s decision today, research had found that robust implementation of CORSIA could significantly reduce international aviation’s warming impact, and that the associated future warming from the carbon emissions of international aviation may be reduced by roughly 90 percent if the sector pursues further decarbonization by mid- or end-of-century.

For more on CORSIA, visit edf.org/aviation. Read our latest aviation blogs at http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/category/aviation/.

(Washington, DC - June 30, 2020) “At a time when Americans are fighting through a public health pandemic and its economic fallout, the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis has provided an important report on how we can reinvigorate our COVID-battered economy and build the 100% clean future we need.

“We have the opportunity to rebuild a better, healthier and more just America. By investing in American clean energy, we can create a new generation of durable, good-paying jobs, reduce air pollution and combat the climate crisis. One of the key provisions is a transition of America’s diesel trucks to zero-emission alternatives, which can reduce health impacts in communities of color and other neighborhoods that have, for too long, suffered far more than their share of pollution and respiratory disease.

“The recommendations in this report seek to promote equity by prioritizing overburdened communities for clean energy and infrastructure investments. We can help break the cycle of environmental injustice by ensuring frontline communities are included in decision making.

“EDF has long supported the comprehensive climate solution pillars highlighted in this report—aggressively cutting methane pollution; promoting and investing in resilience to extreme weather along our coasts, in our communities and across our farmlands; transitioning to clean energy and a clean transportation fleet and advancing climate-ready fisheries management.

“To create a 100% clean economy, we need incentives to reduce climate pollution including making companies pay for the cost they are imposing on us through climate impacts.

“Chairwoman Castor and the Committee have put in the hard work to build the comprehensive plan we need to defeat the climate crisis. Now it is time for our elected leaders to turn this report into legislative action and provide our country with the opportunity to emerge from this challenge stronger, healthier, and safer.

“We are grateful to Speaker Pelosi for her leadership on the climate crisis, which threatens our economy, our communities, our health and the future of our children.”

• Fred Krupp, president, Environmental Defense Fund

(Washington, D.C. – June 29, 2020) EDF joined an extensive coalition of 23 states including California, Michigan and Colorado, cities and regional clean air agencies, and environmental advocates to ask the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to protect states’ long-standing authority to reduce dangerous pollution from cars.

The filing of the coalition’s court brief capped two weeks of examples of America’s momentum toward cleaner cars, passenger vehicles and freight trucks.

“In the last week alone we saw groundbreaking announcements from states and private companies that will lead to cleaner, lower-polluting vehicles in America’s future,” said EDF lead attorney Peter Zalzal. “The Trump administration may be trying to steer us away from clean cars, but the country is charging ahead.”

The filing with the D.C. Circuit is part of one of the lawsuits stemming from the Trump administration’s attempt to rollback American’s popular and successful Clean Car Standards. The administration is trying to eliminate states’ authority to set protective clean car standards – authority that is part of the Clean Air Act and has been in use for more than half a century. California and 13 other states have committed to strong clean car standards; more than a third of U.S. new car sales are covered by those standards. EDF sued to stop the Trump administration from interfering with the states’ clear legal authority.

EDF and its allies joined a coalition of 23 states from all across the country to file the brief to protect state clean car authority with the D.C. Circuit.

“In their haste to dismantle California’s and other states’ clean car standards, the Trump administration exceeded the clear limits of their authority and reinterpreted the Clean Air Act and the Energy Policy and Conservation Act beyond all recognition,” said Matt Littleton, counsel at Donahue Goldberg Weaver & Littleton, who represents EDF in the case. “We have urged the D.C. Circuit to join the other courts that have recognized states’ authority to limit dangerous emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants from cars and passenger trucks.”

In addition to EDF, those on the brief are: the states of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin; the Commonwealths of Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Virginia; the District of Columbia; the cities of Los Angeles and New York; the South Coast Air Quality Management District, Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and Sacramento Air Quality Management District; and the Union of Concerned Scientists, Center for Biological Diversity, Conservation Law Foundation, Environment America, Environmental Law and Policy Center, Natural Resources Defense Council, Public Citizen and Sierra Club.

A coalition of power companies, the Advanced Energy Economy and the National Coalition for Advanced Transportation, a group that includes leading automobile manufacturers including Tesla and Rivian, also filed a brief in the D.C. Circuit defending states’ clean cars authority.

The filing followed a series of other steps in the last two weeks that will lead to a cleaner transportation sector: Nevada took a step toward becoming the 15^th state to adopt stronger clean car standards; California adopted a landmark measure to increase the use of electric trucks and buses; Lyft announced a commitment to 100 percent electric vehicles by 2030; and Ford Motor Company announced its commitment to working with California on stronger climate pollution standards together with a goal of being carbon neutral by 2050. (Ford is also one of numerous major automakers that has announced a voluntary accord with California to reduce climate pollution from cars notwithstanding the Trump administration’s attack on clean car standards.)

“Safeguarding state authority is important to ensure the momentum toward cleaner cars and passenger trucks continues,” said Zalzal. “States must be allowed to continue to lead in adopting measures to reduce harmful pollution from these vehicles in order to protect the health of millions of people.”

(EDF is also a party to the lawsuit opposing the Trump administration’s rollback of the national Clean Car Standards, an action that will cause more than 18,000 premature deaths, add one and a half billion metric tons of climate pollution to our air, and cost Americans $244 billion more at the gas pump.)