Search Climate Insights Directory

Earthjustice supports the EPA's proposed Clean Power Plan but argues it is too weak. The organization calls for carbon pollution reductions of 35 to 40 percent from the energy sector below 2005 levels by 2020, a re-evaluation of the baseline to account for existing coal plant retirements, and the establishment of clear monitoring and enforcement requirements to ensure compliance.

Earthjustice and a coalition of nonprofit organizations petition the EPA to regulate oil and gas wells as area sources, arguing that the rapid expansion of drilling—particularly via hydraulic fracturing—in metropolitan areas poses a non-negligible risk to public health. The document details the emission of toxic air pollutants such as benzene and formaldehyde, highlights the vulnerability of children and overburdened communities, and identifies significant regulatory gaps in existing EPA rules. It concludes that available technologies, such as green completions and vapor recovery units, can substantially reduce these emissions.

The U.S. electricity grid is increasingly vulnerable to extreme weather events, with the average annual cost of severe weather rising from $20 billion in the 1980s to $85 billion in the 2010s. Aging infrastructure, graded D+ by the American Society of Civil Engineers in 2013, is susceptible to sea level rise, wildfires, droughts, and heat waves. The report highlights that thermal power plants are particularly at risk due to their heavy reliance on water for cooling, which can lead to production cutbacks or shutdowns when water is too warm or scarce. To improve resilience, the document recommends 'hardening' measures, such as sea walls and burying power lines, alongside the adoption of distributed renewable energy and energy efficiency to reduce overall demand and carbon emissions.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) evaluates the NRC's 2013 performance, noting a decrease in the number and severity of 'near-misses' but highlighting critical inconsistencies in enforcement. While the NRC successfully managed the restart of the Fort Calhoun plant and identified gaps in aging component oversight, it is criticized for allowing the Diablo Canyon and Oconee plants to operate despite known seismic and fire safety risks, and for improperly withholding information regarding the Jocassee Dam's potential to cause a total meltdown at Oconee.

The document analyzes state green banks as quasi-governmental financial institutions designed to leverage public funds to increase private investment in clean energy and energy efficiency. It details the operational model of Connecticut's CEFIA, highlighting its use of credit enhancements and diverse financing tools to bridge the 'deployment gap' for commercially available technologies. The paper also reviews emerging green bank models in New York, Vermont, and Hawaii, while discussing the systemic benefits and drawbacks of state-level financing authorities.

The report finds that weather-related power outages in the U.S. have increased significantly, with weather causing 80% of all major outages between 2003 and 2012. It identifies the Midwest and East as particularly vulnerable regions and argues that climate change acts as a 'threat multiplier,' increasing the frequency and intensity of storms, heat waves, and flooding that strain an aging electrical infrastructure.

The report examines the risks associated with unconventional oil and gas development, specifically hydraulic fracturing, in the United States. It identifies significant threats to groundwater and surface water quality, air pollution, and induced seismic activity from wastewater injection. The authors highlight how corporate and political interference—including 'trade secret' exemptions and non-disclosure agreements—hampers scientific research and public knowledge. It critiques the 'patchwork' of state laws and federal loopholes, such as the 'Halliburton loophole,' and recommends mandatory baseline monitoring, full chemical disclosure, and the closing of federal regulatory gaps to protect public health and the environment.

The report identifies a significant range of estimated DPV values driven by differences in local context, input assumptions, and methodologies. While there is general agreement on estimating energy and capacity values, there is less consensus on grid support services and unmonetized values such as financial, security, environmental, and social risks. The analysis highlights that no single study comprehensively evaluated all DPV benefits and costs, and that costs associated with increased deployment are often inadequately assessed.

Earthjustice and a coalition of environmental and tribal groups are appealing a July 2013 decision by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to lease approximately 13,175 acres for coal in the Canyon Creek area. The appeal argues that the lease is unconstitutional because it grants exploration rights for an indeterminate period, violating the Alaska Constitution's requirement for 'specific periods'. Furthermore, the appellants contend that the DNR ignored the foreseeable impacts of climate change, seismic risks, and severe health hazards to workers and local communities. They also argue that the economic benefits are exaggerated and that the project would cause irreversible damage to salmon habitats and watersheds, citing similar findings from the nearby Chuitna project.

Abigail Dillen of Earthjustice testifies that the 'Reducing Excessive Deadline Obligations Act of 2013' is a misguided attempt to derail lawsuits seeking to compel the EPA to regulate coal ash. The testimony highlights the severe environmental and health risks associated with the current lack of federal standards, including groundwater contamination by toxic metals, air pollution from fugitive dust, and the catastrophic potential for coal ash impoundment failures. Dillen emphasizes that the EPA has delayed necessary regulations for 13 years despite acknowledging their need, and that the proposed bill would leave the second largest toxic waste stream in the U.S. unregulated indefinitely.

The report identifies heating oil as a significant economic and environmental drain on the Northeast U.S., costing the region over $14 billion annually. It compares natural gas and heat pumps as alternatives, concluding that heat pumps offer superior long-term economic savings and emissions reductions, particularly when paired with a renewable grid. The author identifies high upfront costs, lack of technical knowledge, and retrofit difficulties as primary barriers and suggests incentives, third-party financing, and leasing as solutions to scale the market.

A coalition of 103 environmental and health organizations is urging the EPA to finalize the Definition of Solid Waste (DSW) rule, arguing that delays in regulation have led to significant environmental damage and disproportionately impacted low-income communities and people of color.

The brief highlights the role of the 2008 Farm Bill in stimulating the U.S. biofuels industry and reducing oil dependence. It details specific programs like the Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP) and the Biorefinery Assistance Program, noting that while initial investments of less than $2 billion have shown promise, significant further investment is required to meet Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) targets for 2022. The author emphasizes that shifting to biofuels can improve energy security, support rural economic development, and mitigate climate change.

The report identifies systemic barriers to evidence-based decision-making regarding hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in the U.S., including industry interference in academic and government research, legal loopholes in federal environmental laws, and a lack of transparency regarding chemical use. It highlights how non-disclosure agreements in legal settlements silence affected citizens and hide scientific data. The document provides a framework for communities to seek reliable information and calls for comprehensive laws requiring baseline and ongoing environmental monitoring and full chemical disclosure.

The brief, filed by a coalition of physicians, scientists, and environmental advocates, contends that the natural gas industry systematically suppresses public health data through federal exemptions, state laws, and confidential legal settlements. It argues that the public interest in understanding the health risks of hydraulic fracturing—such as water contamination and air pollution—outweighs the private interests of gas companies in maintaining secrecy. The authors specifically highlight the Hallowich family's experience with deteriorating health due to nearby gas operations and urge the court to reverse a lower court's decision to seal the case records.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) evaluates the EPA's New Source Performance Standards for the oil and natural gas industry, noting that the rules will reduce VOCs by hundreds of thousands of tons and methane by 1.0 to 1.7 million tons annually. However, CATF criticizes a 2.5-year delay in requiring 'green-completion' for fracked wells and the total exclusion of the natural gas transmission and storage segment, which emits over 2 million tons of methane and 65,000 tons of VOC per year.

The document argues that the EPA's proposed air pollution standards for the natural gas sector are essential for protecting public health and the environment, particularly through the implementation of 'green completion' technology to capture methane and smog-forming emissions from fracked wells. The authors contend that these standards are cost-effective, as the sale of recovered gas offsets compliance costs, and that they will not hinder domestic production, citing examples from Colorado and Wyoming. The letter specifically rejects proposed industry loopholes from the American Petroleum Institute (API), such as VOC percentage thresholds and implementation delays, which the authors claim would exempt millions of tons of pollution and undermine the standards' effectiveness.

The document argues that the transition to a low-carbon economy requires massive annual investments—estimated at $1 trillion to $1.3 trillion—that must come primarily from the private sector's $75 trillion in institutional assets. It identifies a gap between the high capital expenditure needs of climate-resilient infrastructure and the risk appetite of bond investors, who demand large-scale, investment-grade deals. To bridge this, the author proposes aggregating small projects into larger offerings, using public sector risk-sharing (such as guarantees and regulatory support), and establishing standardized screening tools like the Climate Bonds Standards. The plan also calls for 'greening' development banks, providing tax incentives, and creating a 'green growth' economic narrative to overcome political inertia and the influence of the fossil fuel lobby.

A coalition of environmental organizations argues that the EPA's proposed rules for the oil and gas industry are insufficient. They demand the direct regulation of methane, the inclusion of existing sources, the elimination of exemptions for certain wells, and the regulation of hydrogen sulfide and particulate matter. The coalition also calls for more stringent toxic air pollutant limits and a more comprehensive health risk assessment for vulnerable populations.

The document is a citizen petition submitted to the EPA requesting the promulgation of rules under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to address the lack of public and regulatory information regarding chemicals used in oil and gas exploration and production (E&P Chemicals). The petitioners argue that current regulatory gaps—including the 'Halliburton Loophole' and inadequate Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)—allow the industry to conceal toxic fluids that pose unreasonable risks to human health and the environment. The petition cites evidence of groundwater contamination, air quality degradation, and animal fatalities across several U.S. states. It specifically requests that the EPA mandate toxicity testing under TSCA section 4, require detailed reporting of chemical identities and volumes under section 8(a), call in records of adverse reactions under section 8(c), and require the submission of all existing health and safety studies under section 8(d).