Complete list of press releases

(Washington D.C. – August 30, 2019) An updated analysis by M.J. Bradley & Associates shows that the Trump administration’s impending attack on Clean Car Standards will cost families in each of the fifty states hundreds of dollars each year in extra gas money.

With the anticipated roll back of the standards, American families will spend an average of $200 more each year – and could spend as much as $500 more each year if gas prices rise. Low-income and long-commuting Americans will be particularly hard hit.

“The Trump administration’s attack on our common sense Clean Car Standards means bigger bills at the gas pump for American families,” said EDF Senior Attorney Martha Roberts. “Rolling back our successful Clean Car standards will also cause massive increases in dangerous climate pollution and will leave America behind in the race to manufacture the next generation of cars.”

The updated M.J. Bradley & Associates report was commissioned by EDF. It finds that with the current Clean Car Standards, owners of model year 2025 cars would see net savings in fuel costs of up to almost $5,000 over the cars’ lifetime – and trucks owners would see net fuel cost savings of up to almost $8,000 – compared to model year 2020 vehicles. Those savings would be lost if the Trump administration rolls back the Clean Car Standards.

For the vast majority of American families, the report found the Clean Car Standards will result in money saved at the gas pump as soon as they drive a car off the lot — and for all families, their savings continue as long as they own their vehicle.

In addition to saving families money, the Clean Car Standards give us cleaner air to breathe, help protect us from the growing threat of climate change, and drive the technological innovation that leads to jobs and economic growth. The administration’s proposed rollback, in contrast, would cost 60,000 jobs according to their own analysis (see Table VII-5 at pg. 43, 265). Independent analysis by Blue Green Alliance concluded that job losses would be even higher.

The Clean Car Standards have widespread support, including from many states and automobile workers. An American Lung Association poll found that more than two-thirds of Americans support the Clean Car Standards. Seventeen automakers and a bipartisan coalition of 24 governors have called on the administration to change course from their destructive proposal to roll back the standards.

“States across the country, public health experts, and even major automakers agree that we need to accelerate our progress towards clean cars, not hit the brakes,” said Roberts.

The Trump Administration today announced the rollback of new lighting standards, which are the nation’s leading energy savings initiative next to vehicle fuel economy standards. The decision will slow the U.S. transition to more efficient light bulbs. Less-efficient bulbs estimated to cost the average household over $100 extra a year in electricity costs, while generating more pollution.

The Trump Administration proceeded with finalizing the rollbacks despite over 60,000 individuals and organizations, including a coalition of more than 50 businesses, several Fortune 500 retailers and companies submitting public comments arguing against the proposed rollback. This standard was poised to save consumers $340 billion and prevent annual emissions of 59 million metric tons of carbon dioxide by 2050.

“The Trump Administration’s decision today runs counter to growing consumer preference for efficient LED bulbs. Leading businesses – and especially those that have made public climate commitments – would be wise to ignore this rollback and stop buying and selling the inefficient light bulbs that hurt business, customers and the environment. Businesses have powerful leverage and market power to support greater lighting efficiency, and now, in the face of regulatory rollbacks, is the time to act and to meet growing customer demands.”

• Elizabeth V. Sturcken, Managing Director, Environmental Defense Fund

(NEW YORK, NY) Heavy rains and high winds pelted Puerto Rico yesterday as Hurricane Dorian glanced the island, sending a stark reminder of the urgent need to invest in a more resilient, distributed energy system before the next storm hits.

Thankfully, Puerto Rico emerged relatively unscathed from the Category 1 storm, which tested the island’s readiness just two years after Hurricane Maria caused widespread power outages and water shortages that plagued residents for nearly two years in some places. Although no major power outages or water shortages have been reported from Dorian, there remains a dire need to shift to a more distributed, clean electricity system that will keep the lights on for all Puerto Ricans facing more frequent and extreme weather due to global warming. Hurricane Dorian continues to gain strength as a Category 4 storm as it drives toward the Bahamas and Florida.

“Hurricane Dorian was a great exercise for Puerto Rico to demonstrate its preparedness just two years after Maria. But we cannot wait until the next storm hits to revisit the urgency of investing in a more distributed, clean energy system. Local leaders must begin now to develop more reliable and affordable energy in communities, including low-carbon microgrids, which are linked to the main grid, but also designed to function independently to provide local electricity during emergencies like hurricanes. We must change the rules that regulate how microgrids are built and paid for, develop a policy that promotes the economic and environmental value of low-carbon, renewable energy microgrids, and encourage private and public financing that match the individual needs of each unique community. Lives are depending on it.”

• Daniel Whittle, Senior Director, Caribbean Initiatives

Environmental Defense Fund is developing an innovative project to demonstrate the feasibility of low-carbon microgrids. Microgrids act as mini-energy service stations that “fuel up” on solar energy and incorporate battery storage and intelligent software. Linked to the larger grid — ensuring the delivery of affordable, clean and reliable energy everyday — these systems will be designed to separate from the larger grid during emergencies, like Hurricane Dorian, and function independently to keep the lights on in remote parts of the island. For more information, visit www.edf.org/PuertoRico.

(WASHINGTON) Today, the Environmental Protection Agency released its proposed rule to completely eliminate regulations for methane emissions from the oil and gas industry across the entire supply chain and to remove all federal rules – for both methane and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) – for facilities in the transportation and storage segment of the supply chain.

As EPA makes clear, this proposal is an attempt to dodge the agency’s legal duty to regulate existing sources in the oil and gas sector. Today’s proposal comes on the heels of an EPA proposal last fall to significantly weaken pollution control provisions in 2016 standards, such as requirements for performing regular leak inspection.

“This proposal is irresponsible, dangerous and out of step with calls from oil and gas industry leaders to preserve and strengthen federal methane rules. Without a strong federal framework in place, the case for natural gas evaporates.”

· Matt Watson, Vice President, Energy, Environmental Defense Fund

Based on 2017 data, failing to regulate existing sources, removing standards for transmission and storage facilities and weakening current standards as EPA has proposed would result in 5 million metric tons of methane emissions annually that would be otherwise be reduced – more than a third of total methane from oil and gas operations, and enough gas to heat 4 million homes. Combined, these two proposals could likewise lead to nearly 1.2 million tons of additional smog-forming VOCs and more than 43 thousand tons of hazardous air pollutants like benzene annually.

Methane from human activities is responsible for 25% of the warming we are currently experiencing. At the same time, the latest evidence shows oil and gas methane emissions are 60% higher than estimated by EPA. EPA’s action today comes as many leading states and countries have moved to adopt methane standards for the oil and gas sector. As with the Trump administration efforts to roll back clean car standards, which has been met by strong opposition from automotive industry leaders, several leading oil and gas companies have called on EPA to maintain and even strengthen federal methane standards.

(CHICAGO, IL) Texas-based Vistra Energy announced today the retirement of four coal-fired power plants in Illinois.  In an effort to protect company profits, Vistra opted to close its more expensive plants outfitted with pollution control equipment, while keeping its dirtier, but cheaper-to-run plants online.

“We are disappointed that Vistra has chosen to leave open some of the dirtiest plants in its Illinois fleet. It is not surprising for an out-of-state company that has long chosen to put its bottom line first, rather than considering the needs of the communities they directly impact. That’s why it is more important than ever that Illinois pass the Clean Energy Jobs Act (CEJA) which will help the state move toward more clean energy while investing in coal plant communities to help them navigate this change.”

(CHICAGO – August 21, 2019) United Airlines and Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) today announce a new partnership to measure and accelerate greenhouse gas reductions across United’s operations and help the company meet its goal of cutting emissions 50% by 2050. Globally, emissions from the aviation sector currently account for roughly 2 percent of greenhouse gas emissions and are expected to rise significantly in the years to come as demand for air travel is projected to increase substantially, even as the industry’s fuel efficiency improves.

“Being an industry leader in environmental sustainability means more than just committing to reducing our carbon footprint; it means working together with respected organizations like EDF to help us implement practical solutions to overcome the most urgent environmental challenges we face as a company, industry and community,” said Scott Kirby, president of United Airlines.

United has already taken early steps to begin addressing its carbon footprint. Moving forward, EDF will work with United to develop a roadmap to reach its 2050 target with credibility and accountability. 

As part of their joint work, United and EDF will evaluate how to meet, with high integrity, the ambitious targets laid out in the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA), the new market-based measure under the United Nation’s aviation agency to limit the net carbon emissions of international flights. United has already begun monitoring its emissions as specified in CORSIA.   

Together, EDF and United will analyze options for identifying high-quality carbon offsets that represent real, permanent, verified emission reductions; that deliver local environmental benefits; and are properly accounted for. United and EDF will collaborate with Conservation International, which currently offers United’s customers the opportunity to purchase carbon offsets via the airline’s Eco-Skies Carbon Choice program.

“Accelerating carbon reductions from the aviation sector is critical to solving the climate crisis,” said Fred Krupp, president of EDF. “Powerful partnerships like the one EDF is forming with United align the strong science, market forces and information sharing needed to scale change, providing a blueprint for other airlines to follow. We’re grateful for United’s leadership and look forward to a productive partnership.”

(COLUMBUS, OH) The Ohio Supreme Court today rejected FirstEnergy’s motion for reconsideration of “credit support” charges approved by state regulators in 2016. The Supreme Court ordered the charge be removed, saying state regulators had failed to place the necessary conditions on how FirstEnergy spent the subsidies.

“Today’s Ohio Supreme Court ruling sets a precedent that will block state regulators from approving such orders in the future,” said John Finnigan, lead counsel for Environmental Defense Fund’s Energy Program. “This decision sends a clear message that FirstEnergy is not entitled to a blank check signed by Ohio consumers. Unfortunately, the ruling comes too late to impact the Ohio legislature’s short-sighted decision to pass House Bill 6, creating a brand-new bailout program for the same old power plants.”

For years, FirstEnergy has been seeking a bailout for its uneconomic plants. The Ohio-based utility finally got its wish in late 2016, when the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio approved more than $600 million in customer-funded subsidies.

With today’s decision, the Supreme Court issued the final denial of those customer funded subsidies and ordered they must be removed. In the three years’ time the appeals process has taken, FirstEnergy has collected nearly all of the $600 million it was seeking. Current law states that FirstEnergy gets to keep the $600 million rather than refund it to customers. Environmental Defense Fund and our partners have been working hard to change the refund law and today’s ruling should give added momentum to this effort.

(Washington, D.C. – August 20, 2019) A dangerous loophole that could increase Americans’ exposure to toxic air pollution has survived a court challenge on a procedural technicality.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled 2-to-1 today that opponents of the loophole should have challenged it in a separate legal setting. The decision did not address the merits of the case.

“Today’s disappointing decision does not mean that the court agrees with EPA’s rationale for creating this toxic loophole – only with the agency’s argument that it should be challenged through a different legal forum. In fact, the court expressly said that EPA’s memo has no legal effect – that it is ‘all bark and no bite,’” said Tomás Carbonell, lead attorney for Environmental Defense Fund, which was a party to the case. “This loophole puts communities across America at risk of increased exposure to benzene and other dangerous or cancer-causing pollutants. We’ll keep fighting to close it.”

The court ruled today that EPA’s memo creating the loophole was not a formal regulation, so it cannot be challenged in court. However, the court’s opinion makes clear that the memo itself does not any legal force or effect, and thus cannot be relied on by EPA, industry or state permitting authorities. The court’s majority opinion says the memo is “all bark and no bite.” (Opinion, page 16).

The dissenting judge in the case would have vacated the loophole, saying “The Wehrum Memorandum … is a legislative rule that failed to conform to the [Administrative Procedure Act’s] notice and- comment requirement. Accordingly, I would grant the petitions for review.” (Opinion, page 37 and 38)

The case centers around “maximum achievable control technology” (MACT) standards for hazardous air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. These standards generally apply to large industrial facilities like refineries and chemical plants that emit high amounts of 187 dangerous or cancer-causing pollutants.

Until January 2018, those “major source” facilities had to comply with the MACT standards for as long as they operated. Then, former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt created a loophole – in a memo issued without any opportunity for public comment or any analysis of air pollution and health impacts.

The loophole allows facilities to opt out of the MACT standards if their pollution levels drop below major source thresholds. EPA’s own analysis indicates that almost four thousand facilities across the country could ultimately use the loophole – potentially resulting in millions of pounds of additional hazardous air pollution.

EPA has been implementing the loophole ever since the memo was issued. EDF joined 10 other environmental, environmental justice, and public health organizations in the lawsuit challenging the loophole. The state of California also challenged it in court.

This June, a year and a half after it started implementing the loophole, EPA formally proposed to codify the change in policy. EPA just held its one and only planned hearing on the change this week. Yesterday, EDF and nine other groups formally asked EPA to hold at least three more public hearings, stating:

“EPA announced the sole public hearing for this rulemaking in Washington, D.C .with only slightly more than two weeks’ notice, a disturbing choice that reinforces the Agency’s troubling pattern of minimizing public input on actions that stand to harm the health and welfare of communities nationwide … a single hearing is clearly inadequate to afford the public a meaningful opportunity to comment.” (Letter to EPA, page 1 and 2)

(TOKYO – August 19, 2019) New research published today in the journal Marine Policy suggests that Japan’s fishing fleets could generate an additional $5.5 billion (USD) in annual profits while supporting a 30% increase in populations of fish in Japan’s waters by 2065 if they adopt policies that promote conservation and offer fishermen the right incentives.

Authored by scientists at Environmental Defense Fund, Iwate University, Norwegian School of Economics and Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology, the study examines the potential effects of different approaches to managing Japan’s fisheries on catch, profits and the amounts of fish left in the water to support healthy ecosystems. The results suggest that adopting policies that incorporate science-based fisheries management into Japan’s current rights-based management system could increase profits compared to the status quo.

In December 2018, EDF applauded the Japan government’s passage of the most significant reforms to its fisheries laws in 70 years — signaling their leadership in helping shift the Asia Pacific region toward sustainable fishing for the future. This new research could help shape the implementation of that law.

“As Japan moves to implement a historic update to its national fishing law, we have a tremendous opportunity to create policies that will sustain our fishing fleets and our oceans,” said Kazuhiko Otsuka, Japan director at EDF. “This paper offers evidence that fishermen and fish can both do better in the long term if we get management right.”

This paper helps make the case for how Japan can improve sustainability while meeting economic goals of fishing communities. Science-based fisheries management that gives fishers a direct incentive for conservation — one of the policy approaches simulated in the study — has been successfully deployed around the world to achieve similar goals, including in the United States.

“Japan is one of the most important fishing countries in the world,” said Rod Fujita, a co-author of the study and the director of research and development for EDF’s Oceans Program. “By ensuring the sustainability of its marine fisheries, Japan can not only revitalize its own fishing sector, but would be in a position to lead efforts to improve the conservation and management or marine resources worldwide.”

“Conservation measures like those evaluated in the study can increase profits and yields, even though many fishing communities will have to reduce their catches in the short term in order to rebuild depleted stocks,” said Otsuka. “The goal is that sustainable Japanese fisheries will enable rich fishing grounds to recover and future fishing communities to prosper.”

“This is the first study to analyze the bio-economic potential of Japanese fisheries based on directions of the last year’s policy reform,” said Gakushi Ishimura, a co-author of the study and associate professor at Iwate University. “We will continue our study to extend the analysis to the prefectural levels to investigate regional impacts. By developing a practical policy and resource management tools for building sustainable fisheries in Japan, we hope to establish fisheries science as a practical science to the society.”

Authors of this paper are Kanae Tokunaga, Environmental Defense Fund; Gakushi Ishimura, Iwate University; Shigehide Iwata, Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology,; Keita Abe, Norwegian School of Economics; Kazuhiko Otsuka, Environmental Defense Fund; Kristin Kleisner, Environmental Defense Fund; and Rod Fujita, Environmental Defense Fund.

(Denver, Colorado – August 15, 2019) Today, Colorado became the first state in the central U.S. to adopt Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) standards for cars and trucks – a move that will provide crucial climate, public health and economic benefits for its citizens.

After days of debate that included, for the first time ever, the express support of automakers, Colorado’s Air Quality Control Commission voted 8-to-1 today to adopt ZEV standards. The vote means Colorado will join ten other states (California, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont) that are now implementing both low-emission and ZEV standards, and it paves the way for other Midwestern and Western states to follow.

“With today’s vote, Colorado joins the growing coalition of states positioned to reap the public health and economic benefits of a rapid transition to a cleaner transportation sector with zero-emitting vehicles,” said EDF attorney Alice Henderson. “Coloradans will see cost savings at the pump, cleaner air, and a safer climate. EDF applauds the move and looks forward to continued progress to ensure Colorado meets its climate goals.” 

EDF was one of many groups – including local governments, environmental justice advocates, the electric vehicle industry, and other public health and environmental groups – that advocated for adoption of the program.

Today’s vote also marks the first time a state has adopted ZEV standards with support from the auto industry. Two major industry groups, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and Global Automakers, which together represent 98 percent of the market, expressly supported the move (including crediting flexibilities jointly proposed by the automakers, the Colorado Department of Transportation and the Colorado Energy office). The Alliance stated in a written submission that it is, “committed to vehicle electrification and working with Colorado.”

The automakers’ support for Colorado’s adoption of ZEV standards is the latest sign of the undeniable and rapid shift to electric vehicles. It also underscores the growing awareness around the country of the clear benefits of a cleaner transportation sector for addressing the climate crisis, protecting people from unhealthy air pollution, helping families save money and growing our economy.

An analysis commissioned by EDF found that the state’s adoption of a combined clean cars program will save Coloradans up to $2.1 billion per year in 2040. ZEV adoption will also have clear benefits for consumers. Coloradans owning a model year 2025 ZEV will save more than $5,000 over the course of their ownership of the vehicle.

The analysis also found that by 2030 Colorado’s combined Clean Cars program is expected to reduce 2.7 million metric tons of climate pollution. However, that still leaves a 45 to 48 million metric ton gap between 2030 emission projections and the required reductions under Colorado’s historic new climate legislation. A draft regulation to meet the state’s new targets is required by next July.

You can read more on the benefits of Colorado’s ZEV program in EDF’s new fact sheet.

(SPRINGFIELD, IL) Gov. J.B. Pritzker today signed into law House Bill 3481, legislation that repeals Illinois’ Kyoto Protocol Act of 1998, which prohibited Illinois from taking steps to reduce carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions unless the Kyoto Protocol Treaty was ratified by the United States Senate. The Kyoto Protocol Treaty, negotiated as an expansion of United Nations Framework Convention on Global Climate Change in 1997, has never been ratified by the United States Senate.

“By repealing this act, Gov. Pritzker and lawmakers are empowering the people of Illinois to build a cleaner, healthier future. Illinois can now take real climate action by passing the Clean Energy Jobs Act (CEJA), which will clean up the state’s power and transportation sectors, while creating jobs, economic opportunity and billions of dollars in new private capital for the state. We urge Gov. Pritzker and lawmakers to build on this momentum by passing CEJA during the upcoming fall veto session.”

(Washington, D.C. – August 15, 2019) EDF joined a chorus of Americans at a public hearing today to urge EPA to immediately close a dangerous loophole for toxic pollution.

“EPA’s proposal is contrary to the Clean Air Act, and poses unacceptable risks of exposing families and communities to higher levels of dangerous pollutants such as benzene and mercury,” said EDF legal fellow Lance Bowman in his testimony at today’s hearing. “We urge EPA to withdraw this reckless and unlawful proposal.”

EPA’s loophole applies to “maximum achievable control technology,” or MACT, standards for hazardous air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. These standards generally apply to large industrial facilities, like refineries and chemical plants, that emit high amounts of 187 dangerous or cancer-causing pollutants.

Until January 2018, those “major source” facilities had to comply with the MACT standards for as long as they operated. Then, former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt created a loophole – in a memo issued contrary to law and without any opportunity for public comment or any analysis of air pollution and health impacts. The loophole allows facilities to opt out of the MACT standards if their pollution levels drop below major source thresholds.

EPA has been implementing the loophole ever since, in spite of its unlawful genesis and in spite of a pending lawsuit against it. (EDF is a party to that lawsuit. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in the case in April.) At least 34 facilities have been able to escape clean air protections for large sources under the loophole so far. An EDF report found as many as 26 major facilities in the Houston area alone that are potentially eligible to use the loophole, and that those facilities could increase their emissions of toxic air pollution by as much as 152 percent.

Then this June, a year and a half after it started implementing the loophole, EPA formally proposed to codify this change in policy. As Bowman explained in his testimony, EPA’s own analysis for the proposal indicates that almost four thousand facilities across the country could ultimately use the loophole – potentially resulting in millions of pounds of additional hazardous air pollution.

At the end of July, EPA abruptly announced one – and only one – public hearing. That hearing is taking place today at EPA headquarters in Washington, D.C. In his testimony, Bowman also urged EPA to hold more hearings and listen to concerned Americans.

“Given that the proposal undermines protections that have been in place for almost a quarter-century and could lead to increased hazardous air pollution at thousands of major industrial facilities, it is vital that the public have ample opportunity to weigh in,” he testified.

(NEW ORLEANS – Aug. 14, 2019) Louisiana’s fall elections will be particularly crucial for the future leadership of the state, deciding numerous seats in the Legislature, the governorship, as well as other statewide and parish offices. Ahead of these elections, a poll was released today showing that Louisiana voters are deeply concerned about the state’s coastal land loss crisis and support coastal restoration efforts to address it. The poll, conducted by BDPC, LLC + Pinsonat, shows that 98 percent of voters say officials should work to maintain as much of Louisiana’s coast as possible, even if it’s not possible to restore the original footprint; and 97 percent want their elected officials to prioritize tackling coastal land loss when in office.

Voters are largely in agreement about how the state tackles its land loss crisis with 92 percent supporting an approach that balances restoration of coastal wetlands with protection efforts, such as levees. On restoration specifically, 82 percent of respondents support sediment diversions, large-scale coastal restoration projects that would deliver sediment from the Mississippi River to build and sustain wetlands over time. Louisiana’s Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority is advancing the Mid-Barataria and Mid-Breton Sediment Diversions, projects that will build and maintain tens of thousands of acres of land and habitat on either side of the river in Plaquemines Parish.

Since the 1930s, Louisiana has lost nearly 2,000 square miles of its coastal land and, without the implementation of projects from the state’s Coastal Master Plan, could lose an additional 4,000 square miles in the next 50 years. Most respondents indicated that protection from storm surge was the most important reason to restore Louisiana’s coast, and 97 percent of those surveyed said they want their elected officials to make decisions on coastal issues based on the best available science.  

“As our coast disappears and the State of Louisiana fully commits to confronting this crisis, voters are in widespread agreement that addressing coastal land loss must be a top priority for anyone who seeks elected office in this state,” said Steve Cochran, Campaign Director for Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

On how to pay for coastal restoration projects, respondents were nearly unanimous with 97 percent saying elected officials must protect existing funds dedicated to coastal restoration and protection in Louisiana, and 96 percent wanting their elected officials to identify new sources of funding for coastal restoration. Also of note, 63 percent of respondents indicated they would support paying a state tax if they knew funds from that tax would go directly to coastal restoration and protection across Louisiana.    

The poll also found that a vast majority of voters (71 percent) believe in climate change with half of respondents indicating that climate change is affecting them today and 72 percent saying it will impact future generations. On Louisiana’s land loss crisis, 57 percent of respondents across the state believe land loss will have a direct impact on them this year with that number jumping to 77 percent in the next 10 years.  

“In a state that has had emergency flood disasters declared in every parish at least twice over the last 20 years, it is no surprise that Louisianians see and are concerned about the impacts from a changing climate and a disappearing coast,” said Cochran. “The stakes could not be higher as decisions made in the coming years will not only determine what kind of Louisiana we leave our children and grandchildren but where that future will be.”  

The poll was conducted by BDPC, LLC + Pinsonat for Environmental Defense Fund on behalf of Restore the Mississippi River Delta to determine the familiarity, interest and support for major coastal issues facing Louisiana. According to Bernie Pinsonat, political consultant at BDPC LLC + Pinsonat, “These numbers are unlike any I have ever seen in Louisiana. Coastal land loss is the most important issue on the minds of Louisiana voters. The issue has significant, bipartisan support from all corners of the state. These results are a clear signal that voters want their elected officials, from the Governor to their legislators to parish presidents, to tackle this crisis head on.”

Interviews for this poll were completed by trained live operators over the phone with 1,006 likely Louisiana voters from July 23 through July 29, 2019. Results were analyzed to ensure consistency in responses. The overall sample error for the statewide statistics is not greater than plus or minus 3.0 percentage points at the 95 percent level of confidence.

(Washington, D.C. – August 14, 2019) Environmental Defense Fund and a coalition of 10 other health and environmental groups filed a lawsuit today challenging the Trump administration’s repeal and weak replacement for the Clean Power Plan – a harmful rollback that could result in more air pollution from coal-fired power plants in many states, and that EDF has previously called “a disgrace.”

EDF and its allies filed a petition for review with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today against the administration’s Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, which is neither affordable nor clean. ACE was designed to supplant the historic Clean Power Plan.

The petition comes one day after 22 states and seven local governments filed a lawsuit against the ACE rule.

“The Clean Power Plan is a powerful tool to address the severe and increasing dangers of climate change. The Trump administration’s replacement is inadequate to protect Americans’ health and safety from the climate crisis – and may result in more harmful air pollution in many states than no rule at all,” said EDF Lead Attorney Tomás Carbonell. “We look forward to presenting a compelling case to the court about why the Trump administration’s irresponsible and dangerous attack on our nation’s Clean Power Plan is unlawful.”

The Clean Power Plan established America’s first and only nationwide limit on carbon pollution from existing power plants. It would reduce climate pollution to 36 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 and would reduce deadly soot and smog.

The Trump administration repealed the Clean Power Plan and finalized its ACE rule in June. The destructive replacement standard will provide no meaningful reduction in dangerous climate pollution, and analysis by EDF shows that 16 states could see an increase in climate pollution because of it. Independent experts have also found that the ACE rule could increase the pollution that leads to soot and smog in as many as 14 states plus the District of Columbia, relative to “business as usual” without the rule.

Opponents of the Clean Power Plan have been fighting for years to stop it. Legal challenges to the original plan have been pending in the D.C. Circuit since 2015. Since 2017, the Trump administration has repeatedly urged the D.C. Circuit not to decide the case while it worked on a rule to repeal and replace the Clean Power Plan. In the meantime, evidence about the dangers of the climate change crisis has continued to mount, and states and power companies across the country have moved ahead toward reducing climate pollution from power plants – in some cases by much more than the Clean Power Plan called for.

The Appalachian Mountain Club, Center for Biological Diversity, Clean Air Council, Clean Air Task Force, Clean Wisconsin, Conservation Law Foundation, Environmental Law and Policy Center, Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club joined EDF on today’s petition.

(WASHINGTON, DC) The United States Departments of Commerce and Interior today unveiled regulatory reforms to the Endangered Species Act, a cornerstone environmental statute that 83% of Americans, including 74% of self-identified conservatives, support.

“On the whole, the regulatory reform package finalized by the Trump Administration does more harm than good to our nation’s wildlife. Many of the rule changes are overtly political, do nothing to enhance science-based decision-making, and undermine key incentives for proactive and collaborative conservation. Further, they would allow the agencies to deliberately ignore how plants and animals, just like people, are affected by the impacts of climate change.

“A startling report by the United Nations recently showed that human activity is putting 1 million species of plants and animals at risk of extinction. To get ahead of this problem, we urgently need flexible and innovative policies that reward collaborative conservation on private lands, where wildlife is most threatened and where we can make the biggest advances in restoring habitat.

“Unfortunately this administration’s reform package falls far short and, in the end, will only increase litigation and delay implementation of a bedrock environmental law, while doing nothing to address the catastrophic loss of biodiversity and degradation of ecosystems on which we all depend.”

• Holly Pearen, Senior Attorney, Ecosystems