Earthjustice blogs

This Coal Mine Has Been Called a "Den of Thievery." Why Is It Still Operational?

Perry Wheeler — Tue, 14 Feb 2023 20:54:22 +0000

This Coal Mine Has Been Called a "Den of Thievery." Why Is It Still Operational?

The New York Times just dropped a bombshell on Signal Peak Energy's Bull Mountains Mine

An expansive view of the Bull Mountains in Montana.

Northern Plains Resource Council

Update | Feb. 14, 2023

A federal judge has halted the mining of coal owned by the American people at Signal Peak’s Bull Mountains Underground Coal Mine, pending a thorough analysis of the mine’s impacts on ranchers, vital water sources, and the environment. The Office of Surface Mining (OSM) is now required to prepare an environmental impact statement to determine whether to allow a proposed 170-million-ton expansion to proceed. In approving the expansion, Trump’s OSM largely ignored the impacts.

In April 2022 a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled that OSM had wrongly approved an expansion of the mine. In a 2-1 decision, the panel found that OSM “hid the ball” on the mine’s impacts. The case was then remanded to District Court to determine the appropriate legal remedy.

In January, The New York Times released a jaw-dropping story by Hiroko Tabuchi on the corruption and criminal activity surrounding Signal Peak Energy’s Bull Mountains Coal Mine in Montana. The story reads:

“The embezzlement and fake kidnapping were part of the unraveling of a coal company called Signal Peak Energy that also involved bribery, cocaine trafficking, firearms violations, worker safety and environmental infringements, a network of shell companies, a modern-day castle, an amputated finger and past links to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.”

While this might sound like a leaked plot from the Western television series Yellowstone, it is very much a Montana reality thanks to the lack of meaningful oversight from state and federal regulators. Signal Peak has been called a “den of thievery” according to the U.S. Attorney’s office, yet somehow this corrupt mine continues its operations, putting the surrounding community, workers, and Montana’s environment at significant risk. As the coal industry struggles nationwide and established firms go bankrupt, hucksters and fly-by-night outfits are snapping up mines with schemes to scrape any remaining profit from the land. Consequently, it is critical for regulators to closely scrutinize these operations to prevent them from inflicting undue harm on the public.

Earthjustice and our partners have filed administrative complaints with and petitioned the U.S. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality, detailing the history of criminal activity, corruption, and health and safety violations of the mine’s owners. In December, we filed another complaint citing evidence of the mine’s repeated and ongoing damage to water sources that impact the livelihoods of local ranchers and residents, threatening the ecological viability of the Bull Mountains and the surrounding area. We have also litigated against the company’s expansion efforts to prevent even more damage from this lawless mine.

Despite the criminality, corruption, and environmental destruction surrounding this mine, regulators continue to look the other way and allow Signal Peak to continue its destructive ways.

Steve Charter, who ranches above the mine, has been subjected to years of bullying and harassment from the mine’s owners. The company was recently levied a criminal sentence and $1 million fine for multiple counts of health and safety violations, which included the illegal dumping of toxic slurry waste, threatening the safety of the surrounding community’s water sources. Signal Peak has attempted to force multiple local ranchers off lands leased from the mine and even from land owned by the ranchers. The company has told ranchers that its aggressive conduct toward them is due at least in part to their speaking out about the mine and insisting on reclamation of damage.

Not only is the Bull Mountains Mine a danger to surrounding communities, it is a climate disaster. It is currently the fifth largest underground coal mine in the United States by production, producing approximately 7 million tons of coal each year, though its owners aspire to be the largest. An ongoing expansion effort at the mine could emit more than a quarter billion tons of greenhouse gases. This would generate more annual emissions than the largest coal plant in the United States. In April of last year, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found that in approving the expansion, the Office of Surface Mining ignored the climate and environmental impacts of expanding the mine. The case is now remanded to the District Court to determine the appropriate remedy.

While Signal Peak’s corruption and criminal history is difficult to believe, it is not unique in being a shady operator within the floundering coal industry. More and more, the very worst energy companies are choosing to stick by coal, while smart companies are transitioning to a modern energy system. NorthWestern Energy, another company desperately clinging to the past, recently announced that it was acquiring an even larger stake in the obsolete Colstrip Power Plant in Colstrip, MT. In doing so, NorthWestern is looking to continue to profit handsomely off Montanans in order to prop up an outdated and unreliable coal plant. The companies that continue to dig in on coal are the bottom feeders of the energy industry.

Federal and state regulators cannot sit idly by as these shady companies continue to trash our climate, lands, and waterways for fast profits from coal. Signal Peak Energy is one of the worst actors around, as evidenced by the laundry list of violations and crimes laid out in Hiroko Tabuchi’s story. The coal industry is obsolete, but still manages to continue its destructive practices by shifting ever more of its costs on to the public, leeching off communities and the environment and putting everyone in their path, including their own workers, at risk. To be absolutely clear, continued mining and burning of coal will cause widespread harm and suffering. It must end. That is why we are calling for Secretary Haaland and the Department of the Interior to halt mining operations at the Bull Mountains Coal Mine. Operations at the mine must shift entirely to mine-reclamation. On that score, there is much work to be done.

This blog was originally published in January 2023. It was most recently updated in February 2023.

Tags: Coal, From the Experts, Mining

Has Translation:

Let’s Not Waste California’s Opportunity to Be the Nation’s Leader in Electric Refuse Trucks

Zoe Woodcraft — Mon, 13 Feb 2023 17:36:37 +0000

Let’s Not Waste California’s Opportunity to Be the Nation’s Leader in Electric Refuse Trucks

Electric garbage trucks will play a key role in California’s clean air and climate future

A Mack LR Electric garbage truck operated by the New York City Department of Sanitation.

Mack Trucks

California’s refuse industry is trying to drive a garbage truck-sized hole in the Golden State’s landmark new regulation to shift trucks to zero emissions. We should stop them.

The California Air Resources Board – one of the most important air regulatory agencies in the world – is on the precipice of adopting a critical regulation to push hundreds of thousands of trucks to zero emissions in California. The rule is crucial to making our air clean and safe to breathe, and protecting our climate from devastating levels of pollution. What’s more, a slew of states will follow suit and adopt California’s standards to clean up their state’s truck fleets, so the blueprint California builds now will have impacts across the country.

But, there is one corner of the regulation lacking in ambition that does not track with California’s leader status on zero-emissions – refuse trucks. At the behest of vested interests in the waste industry, the rule may have a massive exemption allowing methane-burning refuse trucks to continue polluting in California well beyond other truck fleets covered by this rule.

Imagine, fifteen years from now, that the vast majority of vehicles on California’s roads are electric – except for garbage trucks rolling along every street, and in every neighborhood, pumping out fossil fuel pollution. It simply doesn’t make sense. And it especially won’t make sense for the communities, often working-class communities of color, who have landfills sited near them with heavy truck activity, and who would breathe in the brunt of this pollution.

Mack Trucks

A Mack LR Electric garbage truck operated by the New York City Department of Sanitation.

The irony is that refuse trucks are prime for electrification. Refuse trucks drive predictable routes and park in centralized locations each night, making charging easy. They stop frequently to pick up waste along our streets, which would charge an electric truck battery through regenerative braking. And an electric waste truck doesn’t need to idle — turning the page altogether on the decades of garbage trucks pumping out tailpipe pollution on our streets while idling between homes.

For all these reasons and more, manufacturers from Mack Trucks to BYD to Lion Electric have produced a wide variety of electric refuse truck models, and cities from New York City to Boise are already deploying them. A 2021 report by the California Air Resources Board even shows that battery electric refuse trucks outperform diesel, fossil gas, and fuel cell electric models when it comes to having the lowest total cost of ownership. Massive flows of funding from the federal government through the Inflation Reduction Act is expected to drive down costs, leading analysts to predict widespread adoption of electric refuse trucks this decade if state and federal policies align.

The basis for the methane-burning exemption is claims that a state law, SB 1383, encourages us to capture methane from landfills and other methane sources. In reality, a mere 100 to 150 trucks in California are running on methane directly captured from California sources. But the waste industry is trying to turn this mouse hole into a massive exemption for all methane-burning trucks, regardless of whether they are actually burning methane captured locally. To get a sense of just how large this polluting exemption could be – there are 16,500 class 8 garbage trucks in California. Over half of them — a staggering 9,000 trucks — could be allowed to stick with old polluting technology under this exemption, and industry lobbyists are trying to blow that up to be even larger. It’s an overreach from the waste industry and the methane industry.

What’s worse, the loophole allowing this legacy combustion to continue polluting would hit the nation’s two smoggiest regions hardest: Los Angeles and the San Joaquin Valley, as they have the most methane-burning garbage trucks. These regions don’t have the luxury to waste time allowing combustion refuse trucks to clog our streets for the next two decades as proposed by the rule.

A broad exemption by the California Air Resources Board would strike a blow to the credibility of the agency, as the loophole would ignore scientific findings and available zero emissions technology to instead grant an exemption for political purposes. Corporate behemoths like Waste Management, Republic Services, and methane fueling companies can be formidable opponents. But in the face of their lobbying for combustion, we encourage the Board of the California Air Resources Board to be bold and stand strong against this industry with a long legacy of environmental harms.

Tags: Right To Zero

Has Translation:

Celebrating the 1-Year Anniversary of the New York Environmental Rights Amendment

Rebecca Cohen — Wed, 08 Feb 2023 00:06:21 +0000

Celebrating the 1-Year Anniversary of the New York Environmental Rights Amendment

Also known as the “Green Amendment,” the provision was voted into the state constitution by over 70% of New Yorkers.

It’s been a year since New York State adopted an “Environmental Rights Amendment” into the state constitution. Established as Article I, Section 19 in the State Constitution’s Bill of Rights on January 1, 2022, the amendment guarantees that “each person shall have a right to clean air and water, and a healthful environment.” Notably, 70% of New Yorkers voted in support of this amendment in the November 2021 general election ballot. This electoral landslide brought together a broad coalition of voters across age, race, gender, and class. The amendment also accrued widespread endorsements from various environmental, labor, women’s rights, racial justice, and public health groups, showcasing its broad reach and the public’s clear demand for this fundamental right.

Community organizations have voiced that the environmental right is a “powerful and important tool for combating environmental racism and rebalancing the inequities communities of color and low-income communities have faced.” Indeed, the environmental right can provide a strong foundation for new protective and justice-oriented environmental standards. It will also help ensure that state agencies, municipalities, and other government entities are held accountable in new ways to ensure clean water and air and a healthful environment for all communities. This includes redressing past environmental harms, filling current legal gaps or loopholes in environmental regulations, and addressing the disproportionate and cumulative impacts that environmentally overburdened communities face.

We believe that communities throughout the state will play an instrumental role in ensuring the right is faithfully implemented by courts and regulators. That is why, in the year since the amendment’s adoption, Earthjustice has continued to work with partners to raise awareness about this new environmental right and locate the best avenues for community engagement. In the fall of 2022, Earthjustice co-hosted an educational webinar with a panel of community advocates, lawyers, and professors to answer public questions on how the Environmental Right can address community needs and advance environmental justice. Following this webinar, we worked with our partners Environmental Advocates NY, New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, the Center for Urban Environmental Reform, Delaware Riverkeeper Network, PACE Law School, and Green Amendments for the Generations to create a resource guide about the environmental right. The guide includes educational, community, and legal resources, such as an FAQ and a public comments template, aimed at making the amendment more accessible for the public. Individuals can use the comments template for example, to guide personalized comments on how a particular administrative decision—like the issuance of a permit—might affect one’s environmental rights under the state constitution.

We strongly encourage New Yorkers to speak up about this new environmental right, especially in these early moments of the environmental right’s application in New York State. Courts and administrative agencies do not operate in a vacuum. Your voice as an advocate can lift up the environmental right at a protest, on a phone call to your representative, in public comments, in an op-ed, or a social media post to help educate decision-makers, and demand that the environmental right’s promises come to fruition for all New Yorkers.

[Factsheet and template for submitting ERA comments on agency actions found here.]

Tags: Air, From the Experts, Water

Has Translation:

Fighting on Behalf of the Species We Know and Love

Perry Wheeler — Mon, 06 Feb 2023 15:38:07 +0000

Fighting on Behalf of the Species We Know and Love

There are many reasons that people connect with biodiversity. Here are mine.

Monarch butterfly numbers have rebounded miraculously this year, leaving scientists and butterfly admirers alike wondering if it’s just a fluke or if the monarchs are adapting to their historic route’s changing landscape.

Lisa Brown/CC BY-NC 2.0

When I first saw the listing to lead communications for Earthjustice’s Biodiversity Defense Program, I knew this was the job for me. The prospect of working each day to protect the species I know and love was a dream come true. Growing up, I was the kid who shunned video games with my friends to run through creeks and turn over rocks. I loved gardening with my mom and grandma, going on walks in the woods, and spending time near the ocean collecting shells and sharks’ teeth. As an introvert who has battled anxiety for years, plants and animals have always given me peace. In a world that forces you to constantly go, I am happiest when I’m slowing down in nature. I know I’m not alone.

Every single one of us can think of plants and animals that carry an extra special place in our hearts – maybe because we saw them at the zoo as a child, on a family trip to a national park, perched on a balcony railing, or in the woods near our homes. It is incredibly sad to envision a world where any of these magnificent species is not around for our children and grandchildren to see.

There are so many different reasons that people connect with biodiversity: appreciation for the web of life, subsistence farming or fishing, spiritual traditions, the relationship between people and the land, human health and survival, sustainable economics, personal experiences, ensuring access to nature, and the intrinsic value of biodiversity. I am choosing to fight for the plants and animals I love because, like us, they all deserve to exist.

Maintaining biodiversity is critically important for our own survival, as my colleague Tim Preso – who leads our Biodiversity Defense Program – recently wrote in a blog post on the topic. Every living creature is part of larger natural systems that we all rely on. Yet, as the world has coalesced around the need for action to address climate change, the biodiversity crisis has largely taken a back seat. After failing to meet the internationally agreed upon targets for biodiversity set over a decade ago, negotiators from around the world finally came together in December and agreed upon global targets to conserve biodiversity. But will countries actually meet their targets this time? And will it be enough to protect the Earth’s most vulnerable species?

Roughly 1 million species already face extinction in the coming decades, and even many of those that are not yet on the brink have faced huge population declines. Nearly 40 percent of all species on Earth may be threatened with or driven to extinction by the year 2100. There are five main drivers of the biodiversity crisis – and humans have played a major role in all of them. Habitat destruction is the number one cause, along with climate change, overutilization, pollution, and invasive species. Quite simply, human consumption and extraction are destroying the entire web of life.

While climate change is not the sole driver of the biodiversity crisis, the two crises are linked and must be tackled together. Sustaining wild nature is essential to mitigating climate change and ensuring a livable future. The rapid extinction crisis that we are facing calls for a comprehensive strategy that can be deployed alongside efforts to tackle climate change. It is time to recognize that our future on Earth depends on addressing both crises, and urgently.

Every species is connected, and when we work to protect an individual species, we are working to protect that species’ entire ecosystem. Ensuring continued access to nature is not just desirable, it is necessary for our health and well-being – for the food systems we depend on, the water we drink, and the air we breathe. It is time we stop viewing efforts to save species as one-off fights, but rather see these as critical links to the larger ecosystems that we all exist within.

Beyond ensuring a livable future for humans, fighting for other species is important because they all have intrinsic worth. We have caused so much of the devastation that is harming our planet and it is up to us to be good stewards of what remains. To preserve biodiversity, our choices must emerge from a sense of obligation to this place we call home. We cannot continue to take, destroy, and pollute our Earth and expect it to remain livable for ourselves or non-human life. There is no industry or dollar figure that is worth more than protecting life on Earth.

For millennia, we have existed alongside non-human life on this planet. While tackling the biodiversity crisis is crucial to our own existence, it also means ensuring that the nature we have all come to love, cherish, and depend on is around for the next generation. I don’t want to leave them a world without polar bears, or monarch butterflies, or wolves. From the largest apex predators to the smallest native pollinators, I hope you will join me in fighting for all species’ survival – for their sake and ours.

Tags: Biodiversity, Earthjustice Footsteps, Forests, From the Experts, Wolves

Has Translation:

How 600 Years of Environmental Violence Is Still Harming Black Communities

Maz Ali — Fri, 03 Feb 2023 00:33:29 +0000

How 600 Years of Environmental Violence Is Still Harming Black Communities

The first transatlantic voyages were only the beginning.

Sharon Lavigne (left) joins in a moment of prayer at a community meeting in 2019. Lavigne founded RISE St. James to expose and eliminate unchecked industrial pollution in the southern Louisiana region commonly known as Cancer Alley.

Alejandro Dávila Fragoso / Earthjustice

Thousands of children in Flint, Michigan, were exposed to drinking water with elevated levels of lead in recent years. Meanwhile, in Lowndes County, Alabama, residents live with raw sewage because basic sanitation is not affordable. The fifth district of Saint James Parish in Louisiana is known as “Cancer Alley.” The concentration of industrial petrochemical plants causes high rates of cancer among local residents there.

All of these cases are in predominantly Black areas. Studies show that Black people are 75% more likely to live near oil and gas refineries, and Black Americans face higher risks of premature death from power plant pollution.

Teenagers play basketball in the Carver Terrace housing project near a Valero refinery in Port Arthur, Texas, in November 2013.

Eric Kayne for Earthjustice

Although these are examples of the modern injustices affecting Black communities, they are born from environmental exclusion and violence that began hundreds of years ago. Below are examples of this history that, together, reveal a harmful pattern that Environmental Justice movements contend with to this day.

Creating a White Planet

After more than 600 years, the ripple effects of the Age Of Exploration continue to reverberate throughout society. The journeys and actions of Christopher Columbus and other European colonialists led to some of the most significant geographical and social transformations of the Modern Era.

In a matter of 100 years, nearly 60 million Indigenous Amerindians died due to foreign diseases, displacement, and wars waged on them by European colonial settlers. During this period more than 12 million Africans were forcibly transported to work as slaves in the United States and across the Americas.

These events changed the physical landscape of the Americas, altered global trade, and scaled the mass extraction of natural resources from the earth.

Enslaved workers plant sweet potatoes on a plantation in South Carolina on April 8, 1862.

Henry P. Moore / Library of Congress

Without help from Indigenous populations, European settlers would not have been able to adapt to the American topography. Likewise, tropical African agricultural knowledge and skills were crucial to European settlers being able to successfully build plantation economies. European settlers appropriated skills and information from Indigenous Americans and enslaved Africans, but largely omitted these contributions from historical records.

For centuries, Black people have been prevented from defining our relationships to this land. Through government policies, economic institutions, and individual behaviors, Black people have been denied a safe and healthy environment.

The Homestead Act

In 1862 the Homestead Act gave European settlers up to 160 acres of unceded Indigenous land provided they live on it, claim it, and improve it. At the time, most Black people were still legally enslaved, and 90% of Indigenous people were wiped out — neither were seen as citizens. As a result, only European settlers could take advantage of this legislation that then built wealth for their families for future generations.

The Buffalo Soldiers

Buffalo soldiers of the 25th Infantry photographed at Fort Keogh, Mont. On Dec. 14, 1890.

Chr. Barthelmess / Library of Congress

As early as 1866, after the establishment of Yosemite Valley as protected wilderness, a few national parks were being overseen by Buffalo Soldiers — the entirely Black cavalry and infantry regiments of the U.S. army who were, among other duties, stationed at national parks across the Midwest and West. They were among the first Park Rangers.

Despite this, national parks were not safe for African Americans, as lynching was widespread, and most national parks denied Blacks entry, anyway. Prior to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, people of color were legally excluded from (or segregated at) public recreational sites, including national and state parks, beaches, gardens, and lakes.

Continued Racial Exclusion

Farm workers from Florida, photographed near Shawboro, N.C., on their way to pick potatoes in Cranberry, N.J., in 1940.

Jack Delano / U.S. Farm Security Administration via Library of Congress

Even after slavery was made illegal, Black people were still disenfranchised from land ownership and enjoying the great outdoors. This denial of opportunity came in many forms: racial terror perpetrated by the Klu Klux Klan, having their land poisoned and burned, exclusionary government policies, being denied aid after natural disasters, and not receiving loans for their farms.

These various experiences made it difficult for Black people to own, keep, and cultivate land. As a result, between 1916 to 1970, 6 million Black people migrated from the rural South to urban centers in the Midwest, West, and Northeast for more economic opportunities created by the World Wars. Even when Black families started moving into urban centers, they still experienced environmental racism.

Environmentalism will only succeed by acknowledging that injustices against Black and Indigenous people happen alongside the destruction of the earth.

Exclusionary urban planning and predatory banking practices emerged as Black migration changed the demographics of U.S. cities. Black people were forced to live in the most undesirable areas, in neighborhoods that cities divested from — near industrial sites. The conditions Black people were living in, as well as exclusion from outdoor recreation spaces, led to the coalescence of the Environmental Justice Movement.

This movement brought us some key environmental laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act. Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act led the way by prohibiting racial discrimination in any activities that receive federal funds, which includes national parks. The growing mainstream Environmental Movement of the late 1960s and early 1970s looked very different from this, even though it was influenced by some of the organizing and tactics used by its predecessor.

A Movement for the Privileged

Left: Members of the Sierra Club hold “Save Grand Canyon” signs on the Canyon’s edge in 1966. Right: Havasupai tribal members and other conservationists rally to stop mining in the Grand Canyon in front of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, Calif., in 2016.

Arthur Schatz/The LIFE Picture Collection via Getty Images, Chris Jordan-Bloch / Earthjustice

The Environmental Movement was once mostly composed of and defined by middle-class White Americans advocating for the protection of wilderness, animals, and other things that were a luxury to enjoy.

This type of environmentalism ignored the degradation of environments and absence of green spaces in places inhabited by Black and Indigenous populations. It did not acknowledge how colonialism and racism justify putting profit over people, natural places, and ecosystems. Despite political gains such as the Wilderness Act and Endangered Species Act, it was a movement based on privilege.

A Planet for Us All

Participants in the First National People of Color Leadership Summit hold a rally at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., in 1991.

Courtesy of Robert Bullard

In October 1991, the First National People of Color Leadership Summit took place in Washington, D.C. This summit recognized and brought to the forefront Black, Brown and Indigenous people’s leadership in protecting our environments and natural places. At this summit, 17 principles of Environmental Justice were drafted and adopted.

These principles remain relevant today, as the impacts from histories of exclusion and environmental violence continue to influence communities of color. A 2018 report indicated that Black Americans make up less than 2% of national park visitors, which suggests that our nation's racial legacies are still potent in the natural places meant for us all.

Environmentalism will only succeed by acknowledging that injustices against Black and Indigenous people happen alongside the destruction of the earth. As the Environmental Justice and Environmental Movements grow to meet each other, we have to reckon with the past so that we do not reproduce it in the future.

Supporting organizations fighting for environmental, racial, and political justice helps create a sustainable planet for us all.

This article was originally published in March 2021.

Tags: Access to Justice, Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, Endangered Species Act, National Environmental Policy Act, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act

Has Translation:

Es Hora De Decirle Adiós Al Gas Doméstico

Rebecca Cohen — Wed, 01 Feb 2023 23:18:09 +0000

Es Hora De Decirle Adiós Al Gas Doméstico

Los aparatos de gas están contaminando nuestros hogares. Las líneas de gas provocan trágicas explosiones. Electrificar nuestra oferta de viviendas puede ayudar.

Mari Rose Taruc

John Osgood para Earthjustice

Imagine que usted se muda a un apartamento o una casa. Le pregunta al propietario si hay alguna inquietud que deba conocer.

El propietario responde que no, aparte del material altamente explosivo que atraviesa sus paredes y cimientos. Agrega que no hay que preocuparse por el riesgo de explosión, en caso de un terremoto que rompa las tuberías (que no han tenido mejoras y son sensibles, pero no una preocupación). Además, los bajos niveles de gases tóxicos que se filtran de sus electrodomésticos son totalmente normales. Solo sale cuando los usa.

¿Se sentiría seguro mudándose allí?

Muy a menudo, a los residentes no se les ofrecen opciones: el gas ha sido la fuente de energía dominante para calentar y alimentar los hogares desde los años treinta. Sin embargo, este combustible fósil perjudica nuestra salud al llenar interiores con contaminantes tóxicos que se acumulan a lo largo de la vida. Recientemente, un estudio encontró que los contaminantes interiores que se liberan de las estufas de gas causan uno de cada ocho casos de asma en niños en los EE.UU.

Poco después de la publicación del estudio, un funcionario federal de protección al consumidor dijo que su agencia está considerando regular las nuevas estufas de gas en los hogares. La agencia comenzará un proceso de revisión formal para obtener la opinión del público, en tanto que los republicanos y la industria de los combustibles fósiles presionan para que esto no ocurra.

El gas puede ser importante a la hora de calentar hogares, cocinar alimentos y secar la ropa, pero su uso puede tener consecuencias mortales. En los últimos nueve años, la infraestructura y distribución de gas ha obligado a más de 30 mil personas a evacuar sus hogares, ha ocasionado decenas de fallecimientos y cientos han sufrido heridas. Dentro de esa aterradora estadística existen historias de personas cuyas casas fueron dañadas y sus vidas destruidas, como fue el caso de un gasoducto que explotó en San Bruno, California, en 2010, creando un cráter de 72 pies y matando a ocho personas.

Dentro de casa, los aparatos de gas emiten partículas tóxicas que respiramos todos los días. Las estufas de gas llenan nuestros hogares con sustancias químicas como el óxido de nitrógeno, el formaldehído y el monóxido de carbono que pueden causar graves problemas pulmonares y un mayor riesgo de enfermedades cardiovasculares. Sin la ventilación adecuada, una casa con un quemador de gas puede alcanzar niveles tóxicos de calidad del aire interior que superan con creces las recomendaciones de salud de la EPA, en este caso el aire exterior.

Además de poner en peligro la salud pública, extraer combustibles fósiles y quemarlos en nuestros hogares también genera contaminación climática. Suministrar gas en nuestros edificios crea aproximadamente el 10% de las emisiones de efecto invernadero en EE.UU., por lo que es aún más imperativo que eliminemos los combustibles sucios de nuestros hogares y la red eléctrica debido al poder destructivo de los fenómenos naturales exacerbados por el cambio climático.

La buena noticia es que un futuro en el que cualquiera pueda vivir en un hogar saludable y libre de gases contaminantes es más que un sueño verde. Gracias a la Ley de Reducción de la Inflación aprobada en 2022, los consumidores ahora pueden reclamar un reembolso de $840 al comprar una estufa eléctrica. Cambiar los aparatos de gas por los eléctricos eliminaría las sustancias químicas mortales de nuestros espacios vitales y de nuestro medio ambiente. Asegurarnos de que cualquier vivienda nueva que construyamos sea totalmente eléctrica puede aliviar una crisis de salud pública en nuestro suministro de viviendas, y ayudar a protegernos a todos y todas de la catástrofe climática.

John Osgood para Earthjustice

“Hemos tomado 150 años de infraestructura de combustibles fósiles como un hecho, porque ha estado aquí todo este tiempo”, dice Mari Rose Taruc de Reclaim Our Power, una organización sin fines de lucro con sede en California que aboga por que una comunidad y una fuerza laboral segura adquiera una fuente de energía confiable. “Pero cuando la gente ve algo más limpio y mejor, cambia nuestras expectativas. Puede parecer un cliché, pero se empieza por creer que estas cosas son posibles”.

Las empresas de servicios públicos responsables de bombear gas alrededor del país podrían elegir la salud sobre las ganancias al invertir en energía limpia. Pero el dominio del gas está arraigado en nuestra sociedad: más de la mitad de los hogares estadounidenses funcionan con energía de gas, y el sector residencial por sí solo absorbe el 16% de su consumo total en nuestro país.

Los propietarios pueden optar por cambiar sus electrodomésticos a energía eléctrica, pero los servicios públicos presentan obstáculos. Taruc explica que las empresas de servicios públicos privadas o de propiedad de inversores a menudo presionan por leyes que dificultan que las personas se cambien a energías renovables. Esto se debe a que las empresas de servicios públicos privados no quieren compartir el acceso a la capacidad de beneficiarse de la energía limpia, lo que les quitaría dinero a los inversores adinerados que las controlan.

Las personas deben tener voz y voto sobre la procedencia de su energía, especialmente si ésta conlleva riesgos mortales. Grupos como Reclaim Our Power abogan por programas que hagan que la energía limpia sea accesible para todos, especialmente los grupos con mayores riesgos para la salud de los contaminantes interiores, como hogares de bajos ingresos y comunidades de color.

“Existen grandes desigualdades raciales en las soluciones de energía limpia que dan prioridad a los propietarios de viviendas”, advierte Taruc. “¿Cómo podemos llevar energía limpia al otro lado: inquilinos y personas en viviendas subsidiadas? Los nuevos programas deben tener una lente equitativa, en lugar de cometer las mismas injusticias”.

Mientras que grupos como Turac buscan reinventar el sistema, los abogados de Earthjustice están trabajando entre bastidores en nombre de los clientes en las comisiones estatales de servicios públicos, o PUC por sus siglas en inglés. Estas comisiones establecen las reglas para nuestras facturas de servicios públicos, es decir, lo que se incluye en ellas y el cobro máximo.

Nuestros abogados libran una pelea en las comisiones de servicios públicos con el fin de elevar los estándares de eficiencia energética y brindar energía renovable en nuestras comunidades de las comisiones de servicios públicos. Asimismo, trabajamos en estados como California para desarrollar una estrategia de cero emisiones junto con grupos de defensa de la comunidad y líderes de la ciudad. Hasta el momento, más de 60 municipios de California exigen o incentivan el uso de electrodomésticos totalmente eléctricos en edificios residenciales y comerciales nuevos. Estas ordenanzas hacen que las casas sean más seguras, limpias y asequibles: los estudios muestran que una construcción completamente eléctrica reduce los costos de construcción en $6,000 por vivienda unifamiliar o $1,500 por unidad de apartamento.

Estos requisitos locales demuestran que la tecnología para actualizar nuestras viviendas ya se encuentra disponible. Lo que se necesita ahora es un compromiso unificado de los legisladores estatales y federales para elevar los estándares de eficiencia energética y eliminar los peligrosos combustibles fósiles que circulan en nuestros hogares.

Aquí hay algunos cambios de energía limpia que puede realizar en su propia casa:

Calentadores de Gas

Usar gas para calentar nuestra agua e interiores libera emisiones de carbono que contribuyen al cambio climático. Los calentadores de agua por sí solos expulsan el 90% de los gases de efecto invernadero desde una casa. El gas también es ineficiente, ya que los hornos se descomponen con el tiempo debido a los filtros de aire y conductos sucios. No olvide el riesgo de explosión, ya que las líneas de gas rotas representan el 50% de los incendios después de un terremoto.

Una Solución Verde: Bombas de Calor

Calentar las casas con energía limpia puede reducir drásticamente las emisiones de carbono (y anular el factor de explosión). Las alternativas ecológicas más populares son las bombas de calor eléctricas, que funcionan extrayendo el calor del aire exterior y empujándolo hacia el interior. Este proceso es más eficiente energéticamente que la quema de gas.

Estufas de Gas

Las estufas de gas obstruyen el aire interior con sustancias químicas tóxicas como el monóxido de carbono y el dióxido de nitrógeno, que pueden dañar los pulmones y aumentar el riesgo de enfermedades cardiovasculares. También usan energía de manera ineficiente: menos de la mitad de la energía producida por un quemador de gas calienta los alimentos.

Solución Ecológica Estufas Eléctricas

Deshágase del gas y deje que las estufas eléctricas salven tu tocino (¿vegano?). Las estufas de inducción calientan rápidamente las superficies utilizando energía magnética y mantienen temperaturas de cocción más precisas. Sin una llama abierta, las estufas de inducción conservan más energía y hacen que cocinar sea más cómodo, sin cocina sofocante.

Aparatos de Gas

Los viejos electrodomésticos a gas ocasionan un despilfarro. La gran cantidad de energía necesaria para mantenerlos en funcionamiento, gran parte de la cual se desperdicia en forma de calor ambiental, se traduce en altas facturas de servicios públicos. Los electrodomésticos modernos eficientes pueden reducir las facturas y crear hogares más saludables. Sin embargo, siguen existiendo barreras para las personas que intentan cambiar sus aparatos domésticos a la electricidad. Sin reembolsos, la actualización puede estar financieramente fuera del alcance de muchas personas.

Solución Verde:

En última instancia, los reguladores deben nivelar el campo de juego para los aparatos de energía limpia. Una forma de hacerlo es eliminar los límites a la capacidad de las empresas de servicios públicos para ofrecer reembolsos de eficiencia por cambiar de aparatos de gas a eléctricos, algo que California hizo recientemente para permitir que los programas de eficiencia respaldasen la electrificación.

Tags: Clean Energy, Español, Lit: Climate Justice

Language:

Spanish

Translated Content:

Why Induction Stoves Are Better Than Gas Stoves

Has Translation:

Glass Onion Nails It: Policymakers Need to Check Receipts on the Hydrogen Hype

Rebecca Cohen — Tue, 31 Jan 2023 22:50:56 +0000

Glass Onion Nails It: Policymakers Need to Check Receipts on the Hydrogen Hype

Netflix’s juicy mystery veers close to reality when it comes to the pitfalls of hydrogen — which is no silver bullet for our climate crisis.

Edward Norton as Miles Bron in Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery.

John Wilson / Netflix

Glass Onion isn’t just a hilarious comedy with a knock-out cast. It’s also a pretty darn good allegory for how the charlatans in the fossil fuel industry push hydrogen as the answer to all our energy and climate challenges.

The plot of Glass Onion revolves around tech billionaire Miles Bron’s ambitions to power the world with a made-up hydrogen product called Klear — a plan that literally blows up in his face. There’s some fun science fiction at play here — storing hydrogen in a room-temperature crystal like Klear isn’t a thing. But the movie illustrates some of the all-too-real dynamics in today’s energy debates.

Edward Norton as Miles Bron and Daniel Craig as Benoit Blanc in Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery.

Netflix

Pushing for the most ludicrous uses of hydrogen first

You’d think the last place to install a risky new technology would be in peoples’ homes, but it’s the first use Miles Bron opts for, ignoring the challenges and safety risks involved in getting Klear in every household in the country. It’s eerily similar to the way gas companies promote hydrogen as a fuel for home appliances.

So, why is using hydrogen in homes such a bad idea? First, action on the climate crisis can’t wait and it won’t be feasible to use pure hydrogen at home for the foreseeable future. Gas-burning appliances on today’s market were designed to burn methane and can’t operate on pure hydrogen without an unacceptable risk of explosions. Likewise, the gas pipelines in homes and utility systems aren’t compatible with pure hydrogen. The fastest way to tackle pollution from home appliances is by switching to modern electric appliances, like heat pumps and induction stoves, and quickly transitioning to renewable electricity.

Second, even if hydrogen were an option, zero-emission electric appliances would be the better choice for people who want to save money on fuel and breathe clean air. Green hydrogen is produced by using renewable electricity to split water molecules, but the most economical way for home appliances to use renewable energy is to plug directly into a clean power grid. A green hydrogen furnace would require about six times as much wind and solar energy as a modern heat pump space heater. If that weren’t enough, any equipment that burns gas — whether methane or hydrogen — produces lung-damaging air pollution, but electric appliances don’t.

There are some smart uses for truly green hydrogen, like using it to replace all the fossil-derived hydrogen that industry uses today as a feedstock for fertilizer production. There are some sectors where it’s unclear how well hydrogen will be able to compete against other decarbonization strategies, like long-haul trucks and trains. And there are plenty of places where it would be a waste of time and money to use hydrogen because there are cheaper zero-emissions alternatives available today. Unfortunately, it’s these sectors — like home energy and cars — where the fossil fuel industry is most aggressively hyping hydrogen, precisely in order to stall a rapid transition away from fossil fuels.

Bottom line: Like Miles Bron, the fossil fuel industry is hyping hydrogen loudest where it makes the least sense.

The smoke and mirrors around how industry produces its so-called “clean” hydrogen

We don’t know how Miles Bron makes Klear, and that’s part of the point. Miles pitches his wealthy and powerful friends on Klear as an almost magical, silver-bullet energy source that can solve the climate crisis and be made burden-free from abundant seawater. There is a bit of reality here: The only zero-emissions strategy for producing hydrogen is using renewable energy to split water molecules, good old H20 — though this process is no free lunch, requiring massive amounts of energy.

Nearly all the hydrogen sold in California is produced from fossil gas, but industry often buys biogas credits from out-of-state entities like factory farms and calls it “renewable.”

Michael Penev / Department of Energy

Miles Bron’s vague description about how he makes Klear mirrors the often-scant details we get from the fossil fuel industry when they claim their hydrogen is “clean” or “renewable.” When we take a closer look, this claim often relies on a variety of greenwashing schemes to mask hydrogen production’s heavy toll on our climate. For instance, industry is pressuring the Treasury Department to give “clean hydrogen” production tax credits to companies that use dirty grid electricity to make hydrogen if they buy “renewable energy credits” to create a legal fiction that they used wind or solar energy.

The Biden administration should reject these requests to avoid giving tax credits for hydrogen fuels that make the climate crisis even worse. If industry uses fossil-powered electricity for the energy-intensive process of splitting water molecules, the hydrogen fuel it produces is even more carbon-intensive than fossil fuels like gasoline, diesel, and fracked gas. Encouraging industry to scale up its production of hydrogen from polluting processes could have truly devastating consequences for the planet. Today, hydrogen production alone produces more climate pollution than the entire nation of Germany because industry produces so much hydrogen from fossil fuels.

Bottom line: The details on how industry produces hydrogen make a profound difference for the climate and public health, and industry does *not* want the government paying close attention.

Policymakers can be mesmerized by the hydrogen hype

An underlying thread in Glass Onion is Miles Bron’s coziness with people in the government who should have scrutinized his lofty claims, but didn’t. His hydrogen technology could only endanger people in the United States if the government failed to do its job. Even in the real world, government officials can be too quick to accept hydrogen hype, such as the UK energy minister who is promoting hydrogen as a “silver bullet.”

Bottom line: Policymakers should do the necessary detective work when it comes to hydrogen. For one thing, folks can start untangling the industry spin by reading our report, “Reclaiming Hydrogen for a Renewable Future.” As the Biden administration implements hydrogen-boosting provisions of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Framework and the Inflation Reduction Act, we’ll be paying close attention and fighting undue industry influence. In nearly all cases when it comes to transportation and our homes, electric technology already available today is the most efficient, climate-friendly upgrade.

Tags: Biden Administration, Clean Energy, Gas

Has Translation:

We Just Protected a Pristine Midwest Wilderness from Mining

Rebecca Cohen — Thu, 26 Jan 2023 19:14:08 +0000

We Just Protected a Pristine Midwest Wilderness from Mining

Dangerous mining plans threatened to ruin a pristine wilderness and a town’s thriving economy. Until we stepped in.

Canoeing the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness in Northern Minnesota

Brad Zweerink / Earthjustice

Deep in the Minnesota woods lies the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, one of North America’s most pristine and treasured landscapes. For years, Earthjustice has been advocating in and out of court to protect the Boundary Waters from dangerous mining plans. And together with our clients, we just got a big win.

Canoeing over glassy water in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.

Brad Zweerink / Earthjustice

Each year, roughly 250,000 people travel to the Boundary Waters to canoe in the area’s hundreds of clear, glacial lakes in the summer and go dog sledding and ice fishing in the winter. While in the Boundary Waters, visitors experience a rare sense of quiet that’s punctuated only by the wail of loons, the splash of paddles, and the yips and howls of nearby wolves.

Aerial view of Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness in Northern Minnesota.

Jim Brandenburg / Minden Pictures

The lakes strewn across the Boundary Waters, like a handful of turquoise gems tossed on a table, hold an immense amount of America’s freshwater resources. These waters are so pure, people often drink directly from them. The lakes also help sustain the black bears, moose, lynx, and foxes that call this place home.

Downtown Ely, Minnesota.

Brad Zweerink / Earthjustice

Ely, a small town in northeastern Minnesota, relies on the Boundary Waters for recreation-fueled tourism, which pumped more than 750 million dollars into the area in 2020 through sales of guided canoe trips, outfitting supplies, and other recreational needs. Ely is known as one of the world’s best towns for outdoor enthusiasts, in part because of how doggedly residents have worked to protect the surrounding ecosystem.

Becky Rom, national chair of the Campaign to Save the Boundary Waters, and Levi Lexvold, the Ely program coordinator, at the organization’s office in downtown Ely, Minnesota.

Brad Zweerink / Earthjustice

In the mid-2000s, mining companies began looking for sulfide ores in the region. That’s when Boundary Waters advocates in Ely and elsewhere began pushing for a permanent ban on sulfide ore mining in the area.

The historic Pioneer Mine in Ely, which produced iron ore until 1967, is now a museum.

Brad Zweerink / Earthjustice

Though Ely has a long history of mining, even helping Minnesota supply the bulk of iron to the U.S. in World War II, sulfide mining has never before been allowed in the state.

A small frog in the water of Birch Lake, near the proposed site of the Twin Metals mine.

Brad Zweerink / Earthjustice

Unlike iron ore, sulfide ore produces sulfuric acid when brought to the surface and exposed to air, water, and even humidity. This acid can contaminate waterways with dangerous acidic leachate, sulfate, and heavy metals. Increased sulfates in the water could also damage Minnesota’s famed wild rice beds and fuel the production of methyl-mercury, a dangerous neurotoxin that bioaccumulates up the food chain, especially in fish.

A prospecting drill rig brings up core samples in 2011, where Twin Metals Minnesota hoped to build a copper-nickel-platinum group metals mine near Ely, Minnesota.

Steve Karnowski / AP

Despite these concerns, in 2018 the Trump administration reinstated two long-expired sulfide mining leases, opening the door for the Chilean-owned mining company Twin Metals to plan an industrial sulfide mining complex near the Boundary Waters. Boundary Waters advocates knew they needed sustained legal firepower from lawyers intimately involved with protecting public lands to stop the mining proposal. They turned to Earthjustice.

Earthjustice attorney Adam Ratchenski in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.

Alex Falconer / Save the Boundary Waters

“Sulfide mining is risky on its own. And there are Superfund sites all around the country to show that,” says Earthjustice attorney Adam Ratchenski. “But it’s especially dangerous upstream of a pristine, water-based wilderness like the Boundary Waters.”

Mist on the water in early morning at the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness in Northern Minnesota.

Brad Zweerink / Earthjustice

In April 2018, Earthjustice filed its first lawsuit to stop the project. On behalf of The Wilderness Society, Izaak Walton League of America, and the Center for Biological Diversity, Earthjustice argued that Twin Metals’ mine posed unacceptable risks to the Boundary Waters. T op government scientists had also made the same determination just a few years prior.

Former Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Commissioner Tom Landwehr speaks during a press conference at the Minnesota State Capitol in St. Paul in 2019.

Carlos Gonzalez / Star Tribune via AP

At the same time, the Boundary Waters coalition built up public pressure to permanently protect the Boundary Waters. While Earthjustice lobbied policymakers on the Hill, as well as staff at regulatory agencies like the U.S. Forest Service, thousands of people across the country and world sent in comments urging the federal government to adopt a mining ban.

Birch Lake and the proposed Twin Metals mine site outside of Ely, Minnesota.

Brad Zweerink / Earthjustice

In January 2022, the Biden administration cancelled the Twin Metals leases. Then one year later, in January 2023, it enacted a 20-year mining ban in the Boundary Waters watershed. This includes the withdrawal of 200,000+ acres of public lands in Superior National Forest from new mineral leasing.

Save the Boundary Waters sign outside of Piragis Northwoods Co., a large outfitter in Ely, Minnesota.

Brad Zweerink / Earthjustice

“This is a big victory for people and for climate,” says Earthjustice policy specialist Blaine Miller-McFeeley. “We are thankful to each of the advocates, business leaders, and Tribal Nations who raised their voice, and grateful to this administration for flexing its muscle to prevent this pristine and singular ecosystem from becoming just another casualty of the toxic mining industry.”

Boundary Waters guide Dave Hicks paddling his canoe through the wilderness area.

Brad Zweerink / Earthjustice

Though this announcement ensures strong protections for the country's most visited wilderness area, Earthjustice continues working to combat threats to the Boundary Waters. Currently, we’re seeking to defend the Biden administration’s cancellation of Twin Metals’ leases, which Twin Metals is opposing in court. Stay tuned.

A loon spreads its wings in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.

Brad Zweerink / Earthjustice

Tags: Clean Water Act, Mining, Water

Has Translation:

Maryland's Next Climate Challenge: Electrifying Homes for Low-income Marylanders

Zoe Woodcraft — Tue, 24 Jan 2023 00:33:03 +0000

Maryland's Next Climate Challenge: Electrifying Homes for Low-income Marylanders

New report shines a light on Maryland’s opportunity to weave together policies and funding streams to leave no household behind as the state goes electric

A father supervises his teenage kids while preparing food at home on an electric rangetop appliance.

Halfpoint Images / Getty Images

Maryland is in the driver’s seat when it comes to climate action after passing a bold climate solutions bill last year to electrify everything from school buses to trucks and cars, and reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by 2031. But the state is only getting started. With Governor Wes Moore’s ambitious climate platform, the state is well-positioned to dig deeper and shift homes and buildings to clean energy by electrifying our appliances, and in doing so cut out a hefty chunk of nasty indoor pollution for families.

Electrifying homes in Maryland is especially urgent in light of new research making waves this month that shows gas stoves are responsible for nearly 13% of childhood asthma cases in the United States. This is because gas stoves can emit heavy doses of nitrogen dioxide, a form of air pollution known to trigger asthma and other breathing problems. These issues worsen in low-income households who are likely to live in high-density spaces with less ventilation available to them.

Read the full report here.

But it’s not just about stoves — it’s about all appliances in our homes. New electric options like two-way heat pumps to replace dated gas furnaces, and electric hot water heaters to replace old gas versions, are on the market and outdoing their old gas counterparts. They’re far more energy efficient, work faster, help protect our climate, and won’t pollute our homes.

With Maryland in a newfound era of climate leadership, it can be a trailblazer in how it maps out a wide lens approach to electrifying homes in the state. A new report from Earthjustice, the Green & Healthy Homes Initiative, the Rocky Mountain Institute, and Sierra Club Maryland lights a path for legislators and policymakers in the state to ensure that every family in the state is able to make the shift to electric, especially low-income households.

Focus on electrifying low-income households by 2030.
Maryland policymakers and legislators should prioritize electrifying homes for low-income residents in order to focus funding streams and resources where they’re most needed, and concentrate resources where landlords may not be otherwise incentivized to upgrade homes (60% of low-income Marylanders rent their homes). Maryland can hit this goal by 2030, setting a trend for the rest of the country.
Use a whole home approach.
Maryland can also launch a unified whole-home retrofit program that pairs with electrification, providing weatherization services like improved insulation for maximum efficiency, repairing roofs and wiring, and providing energy assistance like utility bill support and access to rooftop solar programs.
Weave $2 billion in state and federal funding streams together for maximum benefits.
Maryland’s existing housing assistance and energy policies are disparate and uncoordinated, leaving the state’s low-income residents underserved and leaving key climate opportunities on the table. Maryland policymakers and legislators should align, braid, and coordinate state and federal funding streams to speed up Maryland’s climate action and electrification. New unique and unparalleled streams of federal funding, including the Inflation Reduction Act, offer an opportunity for Maryland to kickstart an innovative program to upgrade, repair, and electrify Maryland’s low-income homes simultaneously. This funding, combined with other federal and state sources, presents $2 billion in funding opportunities for whole-home repairs in Maryland.
Establish long-term utility planning to get off gas and go electric.
Looking ahead, Maryland should adopt a plan requiring the Public Service Commission to plan a managed decommissioning of the existing gas distribution system as electrification efforts take hold across Maryland. The state should also sunset STRIDE, a program that incentives utilities to keep replacing gas lines, amounting to one of the most expensive programs ever undertaken in Maryland with substantial cost implications for ratepayers into the next century.

More than one-fifth of Maryland’s population, or 450,000 households, qualify as low-income. While the majority live in the Baltimore and Washington metropolitan areas, at least one-fourth of households in the more rural Eastern Shore and Western counties are low-income. In other words, low-income Marylanders in both urban and rural areas of the state would benefit greatly from a policy approach that prioritizes electrifying their homes.

When it comes to our homes where so much of our daily lives play out, every Marylander deserves a modern upgrade and clean air. It’s time to build an electric future for Maryland at every income level.

Read the Full Report

Tags: Right To Zero

Has Translation:

How’s Biden Doing on the Climate Crisis?

Rebecca Cohen — Fri, 20 Jan 2023 19:30:29 +0000

How’s Biden Doing on the Climate Crisis?

Earthjustice’s attorneys and policy experts rated his administration's progress.

Samantha Lee / Earthjustice

President Biden has made bold commitments on climate and environmental justice. Halfway through his first term, we’re holding him and his administration accountable for keeping those promises. Earthjustice’s attorneys and policy experts rated Biden’s progress on goals that the U.S. must achieve — and soon — if we want to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. The verdict: Though there are reasons to celebrate, the president still has much work to do in his first term.

Check out the scorecard below to see the policy areas where Biden is already moving us toward a just and sustainable future — and the ones where his administration needs a push.

Climate Goal	Rating
Accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels	Little / No progress
End new oil and gas leasing and reject coal lease renewals on federal land	little / no progress
Stop a massive fossil fuel infrastructure buildout, including exports and pipelines	little / no progress
Protect the Arctic from drilling	some progress
Stop taxpayer dollars from going to fossil fuel lifelines like petrochemicals, carbon capture, and dirty hydrogen	little / no progress
Regulate energy intensive industries like proof-of-work cryptocurrency mining	little / no progress
Move towards zero-emissions and 100% clean energy	Some progress
Invest big in clean energy and electrification
Accelerate transmission infrastructure in an equitable way	some progress
Fill the vacancy at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission	little / no progress
Secure strong energy efficiency standards	some progress
Electrify the U.S. Postal Service	major progress
Advance just and equitable climate solutions	Some progress
Direct 40% of climate investment benefits to the communities most impacted by pollution	some progress
Make sure frontline communities have a say in projects that impact their health and well-being	little / no progress
Defend Tribal sovereignty, respect treaty rights, and improve consultation	some progress
Change the way we use land to be a part of the solution	Some progress
Protect forests that absorb climate pollution
Invest in climate-friendly agriculture resources for farmers	major progress
Ensure bioenergy initiatives provide real climate benefits	some progress
Strengthen health and environmental protections	Some progress
Clean up coal ash	major progress
Strengthen methane pollution standards for the oil and gas industry	some progress
Strengthen soot and smog pollution standards	little / no progress
Cut carbon and hazardous air pollution from power plants	little / no progress

Tags: Arctic, Clean Energy, Climate Change, Coal, Coal Ash, Food, Forests, Gas, Methane, Oil, Tribal and Indigenous Partnerships

Has Translation: