Complete list of press releases

(WASHINGTON — Nov. 13, 2019) This morning S.2346, the Fishery Failures: Urgently Needed Disaster Declarations Act, passed out of the Senate Commerce Committee on a voice vote after several amendments were accepted. EDF senior vice president for Oceans, Eric Schwaab, made the following statement:

“With climate change already seriously impacting fisheries around the country, fishermen deserve a fair and transparent process to receive aid when disaster strikes. The committee’s members and staff have worked hard to address these concerns and deserve our appreciation for their diligent efforts to improve the current system, which has been plagued with confusion and delay.”
 

(WASHINGTON — Nov. 13, 2019) This morning S.2346, the Fishery Failures: Urgently Needed Disaster Declarations Act, passed out of the Senate Commerce Committee on a voice vote after several amendments were accepted. EDF senior vice president for Oceans, Eric Schwaab, made the following statement:

“With climate change already seriously impacting fisheries around the country, fishermen deserve a fair and transparent process to receive aid when disaster strikes. The committee’s members and staff have worked hard to address these concerns and deserve our appreciation for their diligent efforts to improve the current system, which has been plagued with confusion and delay.”
 

(Washington, D.C. – November 12, 2019) EDF and other public interest groups are pressing for more transparency from the automakers who want to join a legal attack against states’ clean car authority.

The groups filed a brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today opposing the Coalition for Sustainable Automotive Regulation (CSAR)’s motion to intervene in that legal attack. CSAR – which includes Toyota, General Motors and Fiat Chrysler – has asked to intervene in defense of the Trump Administration in ongoing litigation over state authority to reduce dangerous pollution from cars.

“State clean car authority was clearly established in the Clean Air Act, and state standards are one of the most important solutions we have to address the climate crisis, protect public health and our economy, and save families hard-earned money at the gas pump. The American people have a right to know who is supporting states’ efforts and who is joining the Trump administration in undermining them. Toyota, General Motors, and Fiat Chrysler have not complied with basic transparency requirements in seeking to join this litigation to undermine state clean car authority,” said EDF Attorney Alice Henderson.

CSAR is an ad hoc group formed for the specific purpose of intervening in the case as well as the parallel proceedings pending in federal district court. Court rules require groups like CSAR to disclose the names of all publicly-traded members. CSAR’s disclosure statement lists no member companies, in violation of the D.C. Circuit’s rules and in disregard of the transparency the court’s rules are designed to foster.

The move by CSAR – including Toyota, GM, and Chrysler – to participate in the case highlights a rift within the auto industry. Four other automakers – Ford, Honda, Volkswagen, and BMW – support states’ authority to protect their residents from dangerous auto pollution.

Today’s filing by EDF and its allies seeks to ensure that automakers who wish to participate in the litigation do so in compliance with court rules and with the most basic of disclosures so that the companies participating are known.

(LONDON – 11 November, 2019) Electric vehicles (EVs) can not only help clean the air and cut carbon emissions but also save millions of pounds for people with lower incomes, if the incoming Government takes proactive steps to bridge the affordability gap between EVs and fossil-fuel vehicles. According to two reports released today by Environmental Defense Fund Europe (EDFE) and by Green Alliance in conjunction with Frontier Economics and Element Energy, with targeted action, lower-income households could save nearly £350 million in total every year, with cost savings reaching £3,000-£5,000 per household over the time of owning a car.

Compared to petrol and diesel cars, EVs have zero combustion emissions, and are cheaper on a total cost of ownership basis. Yet, the reports show there are significant barriers preventing low-income households from accessing the EV market. By putting in place targeted policies, the Government can ensure those on lower incomes can benefit from electric transport sooner, as well as speed up the improvement of air quality.

“People with lower incomes bear the brunt of pollution from cars, while being least able to afford a clean alternative,” said Baroness Bryony Worthington, Executive Director of EDFE. “The good news is the Government has several tools at its fingertips to bring down the cost of electric vehicles and make clean transport more inclusive.”

Households in the lowest two income deciles made up just 4% of EV owners from 2015-2017, but more than 10% of internal combustion engine vehicle owners. On the other hand, those in the top 20% income range buy over half of the EVs sold annually, but only around a quarter of internal combustion engine vehicles.

If policies help people on lower incomes buy EVs, those individuals can see considerable savings on the cost of motoring. According to EDFE’s report, if half of new car sales shift to electric across every income level, low to middle income households would save nearly £350 million in total every year in fuel and maintenance costs.

Additionally, Green Alliance’s study shows that low-income households could save £3,000-£5,000 over the time of owning a car, if they were to buy or lease a used EV, compared to the cheapest diesel vehicle.

However, EV sales are still largely concentrated among the richest income earners due to existing barriers to affordability, including higher upfront costs and a lack of financing options. For example, 0% APR offerings are largely only available for conventional vehicles. Additionally, resale values for EVs are often disproportionately low, mainly due to a lack of historical data and car dealers’ unfamiliarity with selling second-hand EVs.

The impact of these disparities is an underdeveloped second-hand market for EVs. Lower-income households are much less likely to purchase new vehicles, yet there is only a limited supply of used EVs. Of the ten million cars bought in the UK last year, eight million were second hand vehicles, but only 2.3% of those were ultra-low emission vehicles. Poorer people are thus disproportionately burdened by the fuel, maintenance and repair costs of owning older conventional vehicles and will continue to suffer from high levels of transportation pollution.

“The cost of electric vehicles should not mean their benefits are out of reach to those who would gain the most financially from owning them. For low-income families, second-hand electric vehicles are the route to ownership. The government’s upcoming transport decarbonisation strategy should take much more action to expand this market sooner and ensure an equitable transition to electric vehicles.” said Chaitanya Kumar, senior policy adviser at Green Alliance.

The reports include several steps the Government can take to bridge the affordability gap, including:

• Reduce the upfront cost of EVs: Expand loan and rebate programmes geared at making EVs more accessible, modelled on successful approaches in Scotland and California„ with the inclusion of robust, targeted public education around their existence.
• Adapt existing successful policies: Extend to 2025 and update the plug-in grant, which is designed to promote the uptake of electric vehicles in the UK, to focus on lower income households.
• Ensure better dissemination of information: Strengthen programmes run by the Office of Low Emission Vehicles to certify car dealerships that have the demonstrated knowledge necessary to sell EVs.
• Set stringent sales requirements: End the sales of new petrol and diesel vehicles by 2030 and introduce a zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) mandate on auto manufacturers, potentially modelled on successful schemes in jurisdictions like California and China.

To clean up the transport sector, people of all socioeconomic levels need to be able to access cleaner transport options, including EVs. Making EVs more affordable and accessible will cut pollution and build a more equitable economy.

You can view the full EDFE report here and the Green Alliance report here. Frontier Economics provided analysis for EDFE and Element Energy for Green Alliance.

(WASHINGTON, DC – November 6, 2019) Today, Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) welcomed the launch of the bipartisan Senate Climate Solutions Caucus, chaired by Senators Chris Coons (D-DE) and Mike Braun (R-IN):

“It’s good news that the Senate has a new forum with the potential to advance bipartisan climate solutions. We look forward to working with members of the Climate Solutions Caucus to build momentum for economy-wide action in Congress. Our nation needs ambitious policies and strong market incentives that are driven by science and supported by both Republicans and Democrats to reduce climate pollution and advance innovation.”

• Elizabeth Gore, EDF Senior Vice President, Political Affairs

(DENVER, CO – Nov. 6, 2019) Colorado voters approved a ballot measure today to legalize and tax sports betting that will raise up to $29 million a year for critical water projects that support water conservation, river health, agriculture and clean drinking water.

“Voter approval of Proposition DD is a historic moment for Colorado. The success of Prop. DD demonstrates water is a top priority for Coloradans. It sends a strong message that Coloradans care about building a resilient water future and want to conserve and protect the Colorado we know and love, with healthy rivers, clean drinking water, productive agriculture and abundant recreation.

Prop. DD ushers in an important new era for water funding and resilience in Colorado. We can’t wait to dive into the details to help effectively implement this critical measure.”

• Brian Jackson, Senior Manager, Western Water, Environmental Defense Fund

(Washington, D.C. – November 5, 2019) A federal court today rejected EPA’s most recent attempt to stall full implementation of a 2016 rule that will reduce unhealthy air pollution from landfills.

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied EPA’s motion to re-open its final judgment, finding that the agency’s request was an attempt to “sidestep” the earlier court order.

“The Clean Air Act requires EPA to carry out these landfill pollution standards, which are crucial to protect millions of Americans across the country from harmful climate-destabilizing methane and hazardous air pollution. The Trump Administration has gone to great lengths to avoid fully implementing these rules, even after the court ordered EPA to act,” said EDF attorney Rachel Fullmer. “Today the court said emphatically that delays are unacceptable.”

Landfills are the nation’s third-largest source of climate-destabilizing methane pollution. They also emit other hazardous pollutants like benzene, which causes cancer, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) which lead to the formation of smog.

EPA set emission guidelines for municipal solid waste landfills in 2016, but the Trump administration has refused to implement these clean air standards. EDF along with a separate coalition of eight states, including California, Illinois, Maryland, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont, sued to force EPA to fulfill its duty to protect Americans from this dangerous pollution.

In May, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled against EPA, stating “[t]here is no denying EPA’s clear failure to meet its nondiscretionary duties” under the Clean Air Act.” The court ordered EPA to finalize state plans to reduce landfill pollution no later than September 6 of this year, and to finalize a federal plan no later than November 6 for states that did not submit plans.

EPA filed a motion seeking relief from that court order, arguing that EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler’s signing in August of a final rule with different deadlines required more time to meet the court’s requirements. Today, the court denied that motion, finding that EPA’s that request was no more than an attempt to “sidestep [] the Court’s order, delaying EPA’s fulfillment of unchanged obligations with no guarantee that this precise situation will not occur again in two years’ time.” (Order, page 5)

The court also ruled that, “given EPA’s significant progress and the limited work remaining on the federal plan, the record does not establish that the Court-imposed six-month deadline is no longer equitable.” (Order, page 6)

The Trump administration announced today it has formally notified the United Nations that the United States will withdraw from the Paris climate agreement. The withdrawal would take effect on Nov. 4, 2020. 

“The landmark Paris Agreement was a good deal for the United States and the climate the day it was signed, and it remains a good deal for the United States and the climate. If anything has changed since the president first announced his intentions in 2017, it’s that we have even more evidence that the climate crisis is upon us and that American voters are increasingly saying climate action is a priority for them, too. 

“The Paris Agreement was made possible through U.S. leadership. By withdrawing, the United States abandons its allies in the fight against climate change. It’s yet another instance of Trump acting counter to U.S. interest in foreign policy. He’s sacrificing a stable future for our children to serve his narrow political interests. But the truth is the American people want action to solve climate change. It’s another reckless decision that threatens our economy and our future prosperity.

“By moving to pull the United States out of the agreement, Trump is walking away from American leadership on one of the most pressing crises of our time, and turning his back on the economic opportunities that climate leadership can offer.”

• Nathaniel Keohane, Senior Vice President, Climate 

(BRUSSELS – 4 Nov 2019) The European Union is ignoring an urgent climate issue hidden inside its natural gas supply chain, according to a new policy brief by Environmental Defense Fund (EDF). The problem is methane, a fast-acting climate pollutant 84-87x more powerful than carbon dioxide over a 20-year timespan. And the best options for cutting these potent gases are in the oil and gas industry, one of the world’s largest manmade sources of methane emissions.

In 2017 the EU consumed 47% of the world’s internationally traded gas, making it the single largest market for imported gas. Europe’s gas is sourced from top methane emitting countries, including Russia, the United States and Algeria. As European demand for imported natural gas rises, methane emissions from the industry threaten to undermine climate stabilisation efforts.

EDF is calling on EU policy makers to make an ambitious commitment to virtually eliminate lifecycle methane emissions from all gas used in Europe, including emissions from imported gas, biogas and emerging power-to-gas products as part of the EU Gas Market Reform and Green Deal.

Click here to read the full policy brief titled “Limiting the Climate Impacts of the EU’s gas supply: Key issues and opportunities in the 2020 European Gas Framework”.

“This is a question of credibility for EU policy makers; it will show if they can walk the talk,” said Poppy Kalesi, EDF’s Global Director for Energy. “To achieve the Paris goals, the upcoming European Framework for Gas, must tackle emissions in the energy system today, while creating the framework for Europe’s future sustainability.”

Even under the EU’s net-zero emissions ambition, the European Commission expects gas to be part of the EU’s energy system until 2050, albeit in a diminishing role. For as long as gas remains a part of Europe’s energy transition, it is vital for EU policy makers to consider a broad portfolio of options to reduce methane emissions associated with gas production, transport and use, and ensure that any gas coming into the EU meets the Union’s performance standards.

“Any talk about the role of gas for Europe’s long-term sustainability is baseless without a clear policy to reduce methane emissions,” said Kalesi. “Even as we work to end dependence on oil and gas, we cannot afford to let these potent emissions go on unchecked.”

In recent years, methane has emerged as a critically important climate issue that countries must address in addition to carbon dioxide (CO₂). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says reducing methane is a necessary complement to reducing CO₂ emissions.

According to the International Energy Agency, the oil and gas sector can cut methane emissions by 75% using current technologies – up to two-thirds of that at no net cost. It’s why leading companies, including many headquartered in Europe, have committed to methane targets and begun deploying mitigation efforts. At the same time, new projects like MethaneSAT are helping lead the way for a host of new innovations that will make it faster, easier and cheaper to reduce methane emissions.  

Kalesi added, “As technology and science evolves, it is important that EU policy makers and regulators focus on the desired outcome — lower methane and carbon dioxide emissions — while taking a flexible and dynamic approach to capitalise on the best available solutions and data.”

EDF policy and science experts will be speaking at a number of events in November to discuss the importance of the EU taking decisive action on reducing methane emissions and the subsequent opportunities, including a GasNaturally event hosted by Adina Valean MEP in the European Parliament on Tuesday the 5th; the European Annual Gas Conference in Paris on Wednesday the 6^th; a conference organised by the European Environmental Bureau and Environmental Action Germany  in Brussels, on Thursday the 7^th; and a briefing in the European Parliament hosted by Chris Davies MEP and Jutta Paulus MEP in Brussels on Tuesday the 12^th.

(Washington, D.C. – October 31, 2019) EDF is going to court to gain access to public records about Trump administration efforts to undermine climate science. Three federal agencies have failed to make the records available as required by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

EDF filed a complaint, with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia today against the Department of the Interior, NASA and NOAA, stating:

“The public … has a strong interest in understanding the extent to which the current administration and Defendants are seeking, or have sought, to undermine established scientific conclusions about the threat of climate change to the national security interests of the United States … EDF requested the records in order to increase transparency around this issue of enormous public interest.” (Complaint, page 3)

EDF submitted FOIA requests to ten agencies, including the three defendants, more than seven months ago for public records related to White House efforts to undermine established findings that climate change poses a national security threat.

According to news reports, William Happer – former senior director in the National Security Council and a prominent denier of the dangers of climate change – planned to convene a federal working group to re-evaluate the results of key federal reports about the risks that climate change poses to the United States, including to national security. Representatives from the Department of the Interior, NASA and NOAA’ s parent agency were invited to participate.

After seven months, the Department of the Interior and NOAA have failed to respond to EDF’s FOIA requests. NASA produced some public records (including some reported on by the news media) but the agency has unlawfully withheld others and never responded to EDF’s formal administrative appeal.

(RALEIGH, NC) North Carolina legislators today took a controversial rate reform proposal off the table that, if approved, would have paved the way for multiyear rate increases, allowed utilities to over-earn on profits, and curtailed public input on electricity ratemaking. The proposal was part of Senate Bill 559, which also included some positive elements, like securitization of storm recovery costs – a mechanism by which utility expenses related to storm damage can be financed through bonds at favorable interest rates to help reduce the burden of those costs for customers. A revised version of the legislation, including only the storm securitization provisions, was approved by the North Carolina House on a unanimous vote (112-0). Final vote in the state Senate is expected sometime this week.

“Taking the current multi-year rate design off the table while allowing customers to benefit from storm securitization are welcome developments for Senate Bill 559. Looking ahead, we hope a stakeholder process will emerge that can help launch an inclusive conversation about what types of utility rate reforms will best meet the changing needs of both utilities and customers, while helping accelerate an economically rational transition to a cleaner, more affordable, more responsive energy system.”

• David Kelly, Senior Manager, North Carolina Political Affairs

General Motors, Toyota and Fiat Chrysler yesterday sided with the Trump administration’s attack on states’ authority to carry out their own vehicle pollution standards. In response, Environmental Defense Fund president Fred Krupp issued the following statement:

“We are disappointed that these auto companies have chosen to attack the long-standing authority of U.S. states to reduce dangerous pollution from cars and passenger trucks. It is especially upsetting that they are taking this step now, when so many Americans are being forced from their homes by raging wildfires. The science is clear: climate change is making wildfires worse. State clean car authority under the Clean Air Act has been the law of the land –recognized by both parties – for decades. It is one of the most important solutions we have in the race to secure a stable climate and to protect millions afflicted by climate pollution.

“Many other auto industry leaders – Ford, Honda, Volkswagen and BMW – recognize that strong clean car standards advance American innovation and help reduce pollution, reduce our dependence on foreign oil and secure a more stable climate. Those companies are working constructively to provide cleaner air, jobs and a stronger economy. State leadership is an essential ingredient in creating those shared economic opportunities and protecting the health and safety of all Americans.”

- Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense Fund

(Washington, D.C. – October 25, 2019) The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit stressed EPA’s heavy burden to justify its roll back of America’s Clean Car Standards in an opinion issued this morning. The opinion dismissed on procedural grounds challenges to a 2018 Trump EPA decision; in that 2018 decision, the Trump EPA issued a Revised Determination that concluded Clean Car Standards must be weakened and withdrew its 2017 Original Determination upholding the existing Clean Car Standards.

“Today’s judicial ruling that the Trump administration must address the rigorous facts showing the feasibility and extensive benefits of our nation’s clean cars standards establishes an insurmountable burden for Trump’s factually flawed attack on these climate and clean air safeguards,” said Martha Roberts, Senior Attorney, Environmental Defense Fund.

The Court emphasized that “[t]he Original Determination has been withdrawn, but the evidence supporting it stands. If EPA’s rulemaking results in changes to the existing 2012 standards, it will be required to provide a reasoned explanation and cannot ignore prior factual findings and the supporting record evidence contradicting the new policy.” (pg. 21)

The Court specifically cited and relied upon portions of the oral argument in which counsel for EPA acknowledged that the agency’s obligation to justify any departures from the existing standards and its extensive underlying record is wholly unaffected by the 2018 Revised Determination. Instead, the 2017 Determination endorsing the existing standards remains the most recent final agency action for purposes of judicial review of “any future final action.” Op. 17 (citing recording of oral argument at 46:06–12, 47:30–48:52).

The opinion highlighted the extensive record supporting the existing Clean Car Standards, including EPA’s findings, as part of a “1,217-page Draft Technical Assessment Report,” that “[a] wider range of technologies exist[s] for manufacturers to use to meet the MY 2022–2025 standards, and at costs that are similar or lower, than those projected” when the standards were established in 2012. (pg. 10)

The Clean Car Standards are one of our nation’s biggest environmental success stories. They reduce climate pollution, spur fuel efficiency gains, and save families money at the gas pump.

In April 2018, then-EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt issued a Revised Final Determination withdrawing the agency’s prior finding that the standards are feasible and cost effective, and declared that the standards should be rolled back. Pruitt’s determination was based almost entirely on auto industry statements.

EDF – along with the Center for Biological Diversity, Conservation Law Foundation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Public Citizen, Inc., Sierra Club, and Union for Concerned Scientists – asked the D.C. Circuit to review and set aside that Revised Final Determination. A coalition of 18 states and an industry coalition including major power companies and two auto manufacturers also challenged the Revised Final Determination. The court today declined to rule on the merits of these challenges; instead concluding that the 2018 action had no legal effect.

The Trump administration formally proposed to roll back the Clean Car Standards in August 2018, in spite of massive opposition and the pending litigation.

The administration’s own analysis estimates that the rollback will cost 60,000 jobs (see Table VII-5 at pg. 43,265), and independent analysis by Blue Green Alliance concluded that job losses would be even higher. An updated analysis by M.J. Bradley & Associates shows that American families would spend an average of $200 more each year on gas if the administration rolls back the Clean Car Standards – and could spend as much as $500 more each year if gas prices rise. 17 automakers and a bipartisan coalition of 24 governors have called on the administration to withdraw this destructive proposal. Nevertheless, the administration finalized an attack on state clean car standards and signaled its intention to soon finalize a rollback of federal clean car standards.

You can read more about the Clean Car Standards, including all legal briefs, on EDF’s website.

(OSLO, Norway, Oct. 23, 2019) – Environmental Defense Fund announced today that it is joining a partnership to improve environmental outcomes for the ocean through China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The partnership, formally known as the Thematic Partnership on Maritime Community with a Shared Future and Marine Environment Governance, was announced at the Our Ocean Conference in Oslo, Norway by a representative from China’s Ministry of Environment and Ecology (MEE).

The partnership seeks to unleash the potential of a sustainable Maritime Silk Road by encouraging collaboration in marine governance, building capacity for marine environmental stewardship and promoting research and understanding of critical marine conservation issues among countries participating in the Belt and Road Initiative.

Other founding members of the partnership include DNV GL, Bloomberg Philanthropies and China’s National Marine Environmental Monitoring Center.

Along with other partnerships that focus on green energy, biodiversity and global climate change, the marine partnership is the newest of 10 sectoral efforts that comprise the BRI International Green Development Coalition, or BRIGC, which seeks to promote the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals through the BRI. The BRIGC includes environment ministries of more than 25 countries, eight intergovernmental organizations and over 60 NGOs and research institutions.

“Addressing threats to the oceans requires not only the efforts of individual countries, but also the concerted efforts of the international community,” said Wang Juying, Director General of National Marine Environmental Monitoring Center, MEE. “This thematic partnership conforms with the goals and principles of BRI International Green Development Coalition, the SDG 14 and the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (2021-2030).”

“We must seize every opportunity to move toward greater ocean health and resilience — and the work of the oceans thematic partnership will be an important element in advancing action toward the Sustainable Development Goals,” said Eric Schwaab, Senior Vice President, Oceans for Environmental Defense Fund.

Another key area of engagement for the partnership will be on marine biodiversity conservation, as nations come together in China in 2020 for the next Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

The Trump administration today announced it was suing the state of California over its decision with Quebec to mutually recognize pollution reductions under California’s enforceable pollution limit as part of the Western Climate Initiative. 

“This is another attempt by the Trump administration to dismantle clean air laws and climate protections across the country. The administration continues to pursue policies that increase pollution.

“Under Republican and Democratic governors, California rigorously designed this program to be on solid legal and constitutional ground.

“California and Quebec are modeling an innovative, legally and environmentally robust program that cuts pollution and delivers economic incentives for cleaner energy, fuels and business practices.

“The administration is yet again not only tearing down critical health protections and safeguards, but is going after others who seek to uphold or extend them.”

• Derek Walker, Vice President, U.S. Climate, Environmental Defense Fund