Environmental groups lose court challenge to Alaska LNG exports
April 15 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Tuesday rejected a challenge by environmental groups to a decision by Democratic former President Joe Biden's administration approving exports from a planned $39 billion liquefied natural gas project in Alaska.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held the U.S. Department of Energy's conclusion, opens new tab that it would be impossible to quantify the project's contribution to climate-changing greenhouse gases did not violate the National Environmental Policy Act.
The project by the Alaska Gasline Development Corp calls for developing a $44 billion 800-mile (1,300-km) pipeline to move gas stranded in Alaska's remote north across the state before being shipped overseas.
The Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity had argued the Energy Department's approval of the project violated the law by overstating the uncertainty of its impact on climate change while ignoring that its claimed economic benefits were themselves speculative.
U.S. Circuit Judge A. Raymond Randolph, writing for the panel, said that Congress in adopting the Natural Gas Act had "expressed a preference for permitting exports, so long as our nation has an abundance of this natural resource, as it does."
Randolph, an appointee of Republican President George H.W. Bush, said the plaintiffs' objection to the project was "not well-founded" and that "overwhelming evidence" produced by the agency supported finding the impact LNG exports would have on climate change were too uncertain to quantify.
"In short, the impacts of downstream emissions in foreign countries are not reasonably foreseeable and so any alleged failure to quantify those impacts does not amount to a violation of NEPA," Randolph wrote.
His opinion was joined by U.S. Circuit Judges Justin Walker, an appointee of Republican President Donald Trump, and Brad Garcia, a Biden appointee.
"Obviously, we're very pleased with the result," said Howard Nelson, a lawyer with the Alaska Gasline Development Corp at Greenberg Traurig. He said the project had been thoroughly vetted by the Energy Department and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission over the last decade.
A spokesperson for Earthjustice, which represented the environmental groups, said it was disappointed and evaluating the decision. The Energy Department did not respond to a request for comment.
In 2020, toward the tail end of Trump's first term in office, the Energy Department granted approval for LNG exports to countries with which the United States did not have a free trade agreement.
The Energy Department under Biden, at the behest of the environmental group Sierra Club, agreed to conduct new environmental review studies but ultimately reaffirmed the approval of exports in April 2023.
The Energy Department concluded that exports would likely create jobs in the fields of natural gas development, production and transportation, help lower natural gas prices in the state and boost the national gross domestic product.
The project continues to have Trump's backing now that he is back in office. Last month, Alaska's governor and state representatives visited Japan and three other Asian countries to court investors for the project.
The case is Sierra Club v U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, No. 20-1503.
For the environmental groups: Moneen Nasmith of Earthjustice
For the Energy Department: John Smeltzer of the U.S. Department of Justice
For the Alaska Gas Development Corp: Howard Nelson of Greenberg Traurig
Read more:
US appeals court likely to reject challenge to Alaska LNG exports
Youth climate-change lawsuit targets Alaska LNG project
Alaska LNG project clears legal challenge over environmental harms
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
43 minutes ago
- Reuters
US energy firms eye new Northeast natgas pipelines, buoyed by Trump and demand outlook
June 30 (Reuters) - U.S. energy companies are eying renewed opportunities to build natural gas pipelines to tap in to Appalachia shale formations in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia, buoyed by U.S. President Donald Trump's pro-energy policies and expectations that demand for the fuel will rise in coming years. The U.S. is already the world's top gas producer and exporter of liquefied natural gas. While the country helps meet fuel demand around the world, many consumers in the U.S. Northeast do not have access to gas due to a lack of pipeline infrastructure and instead continue to use heating oil in their homes and businesses. The Appalachia shale fields, which cover the Marcellus and Utica formations, have the largest gas reserves in the U.S., but energy companies have limited ability to move more of that fuel to the rest of the country because most existing pipelines are already near full. In addition, companies have found it tough to build new projects in the region due to legal and regulatory pushback from states and local and environmental groups. Output growth in the region, which produces about a third of the nation's gas, has stalled in recent years after some firms lost billions on delayed or canceled pipes. But now, as Trump rolls back regulations to boost domestic energy production, several U.S. firms, including Williams Cos (WMB.N), opens new tab, Boardwalk Pipeline, DT Midstream (DTM.N), opens new tab and EQT (EQT.N), opens new tab, have proposed building or expanding pipelines and other infrastructure in the Northeast. "We are actively evaluating opportunities to expand infrastructure," Amy Rogers, spokeswoman at EQT, the nation's second-biggest gas producer with operations in Appalachia, told Reuters. "Enhancing pipeline capacity is essential to unlocking Appalachian supply," she said. In 2024, the U.S. produced about 103.2 billion cubic feet per day (bcfd) of gas and consumed a record 90.5 bcfd of the fuel, according to U.S. Energy Information Administration data. One billion cubic feet of gas is enough to supply about 5 million U.S. homes for a day. Analysts expect that new LNG export plants and electric generation facilities to power artificial intelligence at data centers will push U.S. power and gas demand to record highs in 2025 and 2026 and beyond. Output from Appalachia has increased every year since at least 2009 when the region produced just 1.7 bcfd of gas. Lack of pipeline capacity, however, has slowed that growth to an average of just 2% a year from 2020 to 2024 versus an average of 15% a year from 2015 to 2019, according to EIA data. Looking forward, output in the region is expected to grow by an average of only 1% a year in 2025 and 2026 - to 36.2 bcfd and 36.6 bcfd, respectively - according to EIA projections. New infrastructure, coupled with growing energy needs in the U.S., could add up to 5 bcfd of new demand for Appalachia gas supplies through 2030, said Jack Weixel, an analyst with consultancy East Daley Analytics. "That is definitely a lot more than anyone was expecting from Appalachia just a mere 12 months ago," he said. Support from the Trump administration has already prompted pipeline operator Williams to begin reviving two canceled projects to transport gas from Pennsylvania: the 0.65 bcfd Constitution Pipeline to New York and the 0.4 bcfd Northeast Supply Enhancement to New Jersey and New York. "The NESE and Constitution projects are essential to address persistent natural gas supply constraints in the Northeast, constraints that have led to higher energy costs for consumers," said a spokesperson for Williams. During the winter of 2024-2025, it cost about twice as much to heat a home with oil than with gas, according to federal energy estimates. More than 80% of the roughly 4.6 million U.S. homes still using heating oil as their primary heating fuel in 2024 were located in the Northeast region. Williams canceled Constitution in 2020 and NESE in 2024 after years of fighting for permits, especially water permits, from state regulators. State environmental regulators in New York and New Jersey did not comment directly on Williams filings to revive the NESE project, which runs through both states. In New York, Millennium Pipeline, meanwhile, said it plans to begin negotiations for binding commitments for a proposed expansion that could add up to 0.5 bcfd of capacity to its existing 2.0 bcfd pipe. High interest from shippers underscored the need for additional pipeline capacity in the region, Millennium said, which anticipates that the expansion, if approved by its owners, could start service by late 2029. Millennium is owned by units of DT Midstream and Canadian energy firm TC Energy ( opens new tab. Meanwhile, EQT and partners want to extend their existing 2.0 bcfd Mountain Valley Pipeline from West Virginia to Virginia into North Carolina with the proposed 0.55 bcfd Southgate expansion project. The $7.85 billion Mountain Valley Pipeline, which entered service in 2024 and whose construction cost was more than twice the amount originally planned, was the last big pipeline to enter service in the Northeast region after years of delays. In Ohio, Boardwalk Pipelines said it is evaluating interest for its proposed Borealis pipeline project, which could create up to 2.0 bcfd of incremental transportation to markets from Ohio to Louisiana. Still, despite Trump's pro-energy policies, some of the same headwinds pipeline projects faced in the past are likely to resurface. Several organizations, including the Sierra Club environmental group, have already filed protests against Williams' NESE with the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which oversees federal permitting of gas pipeline projects. "The Northeast does not need more gas pipelines that pollute our neighborhoods and leave us vulnerable to price spikes from global volatility, especially as gas demand locally is already beginning to wane," Jasmine Vazin, director of the Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign at the Sierra Club, told Reuters in an email. The following table lists the gas pipes in various stages of development in recent years that could move more fuel from the Appalachia region.
Reuters
5 hours ago
- Reuters
Australia considers gas reservation for east coast in sweeping review of market rules
SYDNEY, June 30 (Reuters) - The Australian government said on Monday it will consider creating a gas reservation on the country's east coast as part of a sweeping review of market rules to prevent supply shortages. The competition regulator has warned of looming shortfalls for the country's populous east coast, with the latest forecast pointing to a gap by 2028 without new investment. Most reserves are located in the remote northwest. Australia, which exports more gas than it consumes, is also keen to maintain its reputation as a major reliable exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and that will be a major aim of the review. Market regulations under review include export controls, a mandatory code governing sales of the fuel on the east coast and government agreements with major producers. "It's critical that we use this review to get the settings right in our gas market, ensuring we are securing affordable Australian gas for Australian use, while remaining a reliable energy exporter and delivering lasting energy security in our region," Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen said in a statement. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's centre left government sees gas as playing a role beyond 2050 as the country moves rapidly away from its dependence on coal-fired power stations. The review will examine the "effectiveness and coherence" of the current rules, identify improvements and consider consolidating rules to create a more "stable regulatory environment" for investors. Areas of focus include supply security, pricing, transparency, market conduct, and the impact of regulations on the competitiveness of Australia's LNG export industry. Speaking about the potential for a gas reservation, Bowen told a news conference that any new requirements would be "prospective" without "ripping up existing contracts". Some of the government's policies have come under fire from industry players. In particular, it introduced caps on wholesale prices in 2022 to keep energy prices down in the wake of Russia's war on Ukraine. The price cap has since been incorporated into the mandatory industry code of conduct. Japanese LNG importers, some of Australia's biggest customers, have told Reuters that the Labor government's policies have increased supply uncertainty and hiked costs at gas facilities in which they have stakes. Major gas producers, including Shell (SHEL.L), opens new tab, which exports gas from the Queensland Curtis LNG project, and ExxonMobil (XOM.N), opens new tab, which produces gas in the Bass Strait, have also been critical.
The Herald Scotland
8 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
What to know about a vote-a-rama, the Senate's voting marathon
Few if any of the amendments are expected to win enough support to add or remove provisions from the bill. But it is still a rare occasion when senators can get votes on nearly any subject before the final vote to approve the entire legislative package. Here's what you need to know about a vote-a-rama. What is a vote-a-rama? A vote-a-rama is a legislative event that was born out of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, according to the Senate's website. Following a debate on a budget resolution or reconciliation bill, senators can introduce an unlimited number of amendments with each receiving a vote. Republicans on June 28 offered up different interpretations on the importance of the amendment process, with Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, signaling she too had things she'd seek to revise that will go a long way toward helping her support the package. "There's some very good changes that have been made in the latest version, but I want to see further changes," Collins said. Collins' GOP colleague, Sen. Brian Moreno of Ohio, painted a different and more partisan picture on the amendment slog ahead. "I want everybody watching this to remember this as you listen to probably what's going to be 30-plus hours of complete nonsense from the other side," the freshman Republican said on the floor. The Senate previously defined a vote-a-rama as a piece of legislation voted on 15 times or more in a day. Daniel S. Holt, Associate Historian for the U.S. Senate Historical Office, told USA TODAY in an email that the change was made to align the chamber's definition with its connections to budget bills. "While the term is completely colloquial and has no firm definition in any official manner, we thought this was more in-line with the historical use of the term," Holt said. When was the first vote-a-rama? The Senate credits the first vote-a-rama to votes on a budget resolution taken on May 12, 1980. The chamber's website states that staff had been using the term as early as 1992. When Republican Whip Trent Lott of Mississippi was quoted by United Press International in 1996 using the phrase to refer to the event, it stuck. How many vote-a-ramas have there been? The Senate counts 45 vote-a-ramas. Which vote-a-rama had the most votes? The vote-a-rama held on March 13, 2008, holds the current record for most amendments voted on: 44. How does a vote-a-rama work? Votes in a vote-a-rama work differently than during regular Senate order. Senate rules preclude debate on an amendment during the marathon of votes, though they can be waived to allow an opponent and a supporter of an amendment to speak for 30 seconds - according to former Senate aide Keith Hennessey. Votes are taken consecutively, and senators agree to shorten the window for votes from 15 minutes to 10 minutes, according to Hennessey. Can senators eat or drink during a vote-a-rama? Senate rules prohibit food on the floor. But the good news is they do not have to remain on the floor for the entirety of the proceedings. One quirk in precedent allows for members to drink milk while in the chamber. On January 24, 1966, then Sen. Everett Dirksen, R-Illinois, asked the presiding officer if a page could go to a restaurant and return with a glass of milk while debating a bill to repeal a portion of the Taft-Hartly Act. The Congressional record from the day shows the presiding officer saying that there was nothing in the rules prohibiting it. Senators also do have access to candy throughout the proceedings through "the candy desk" currently held by Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Oklahoma. The tradition of keeping candy in the desk nearest to the busiest entrance in the chamber began in 1965 when then Sen. George Murphy, R-California, kept lozenges to help soothe his throat following surgery and shared them with members across the aisle, according to the Senate.
