JUNEAU (ÁAKʼW ḴWÁAN TERRITORY) — A broad coalition of Alaska Native Tribes, commercial fishers, small tourism businesses, conservation groups, and other forest advocates are seeking to defend last year’s reinstatement of National Roadless Rule protections across the Tongass National Forest in Southeast Alaska by intervening in several legal challenges opposing the rule.

The coalition of Tribes and forest advocates, represented by Earthjustice and the Natural Resources Defense Council, is intervening to prevent industrial logging and damaging roadbuilding on over 9 million mostly undeveloped acres within the 17-million-acre Tongass National Forest.

When the Roadless Rule was reinstated last January on the Tongass National Forest by the U.S. Forest Service, the decision was widely celebrated by Tribal Nations in Southeast Alaska, across Alaska and nationally. The reinstatement decision recognized the need to preserve the Tongass’ roadless areas to protect cultural uses, enhance carbon storage, and conserve biodiversity, and noted strong and uniform support for the rule among Southeast Alaska Tribal Nations.

Despite the widespread popularity of Forest Service’s decision, the State of Alaska, two power companies and a coalition of business and industry supporters filed three separate lawsuits in September asking a federal court in Alaska to overturn the 2023 protections in favor of the 2020 Trump-era Roadless Rule excluding the Tongass.

Under the current Roadless Rule protections, sustainable economies that center the priorities of Tribes and local communities are taking root and flourishing. Overturning these protections would roll back progress toward a more sustainable future and bring back the threat of large-scale logging, which is why 16 Tribes, businesses, fishing, and conservation groups are intervening in the lawsuits today to uphold the rule.

The rule, which recognizes that Southeast Alaska’s future depends on sustainable uses of the forest, is intended to prevent large-scale industrial logging like clear cutting and to conserve the region’s old-growth forests. Old-growth forests are central to the cultures, traditions and lifeways of the Tlingit, Haida and Tsimshian people, essential for climate protection and important for many purposes to many people, communities and businesses who live on or near the forest.

While the Roadless Rule prohibits logging and logging roads, it allows for other development projects, including hard rock mines, federal-aid highways, utility lines, hydropower projects and other energy projects.

The following statements were issued in response to today’s filing.

Joel Jackson, President, Organized Village of Kake:

“The Roadless Rule has helped protect the Tongass National from harmful logging and road building. Without old growth timber, we lose an important carbon sink and habitat essential to the survival of salmon, people and many other species. The Tongass Roadless Rule is important to everyone – to our way of life and for streams, salmon, deer, and all the forest animals and plants.”

Norman Skan, President, Ketchikan Indian Community:

“The Roadless Rule is beneficial and allows our Tribe and community to thrive. Ketchikan Indian Community is committed to continue working with our tribal neighbors and other stakeholders on this critically important issue.”

Nathan Moulton, Tribal Administrator, Hoonah Indian Association:

“Our lifestyle, culture and foods are linked in critical and dynamic ways to the Tongass National Forest, and so are the economies that power our communities. The Roadless Rule reduces the risk of long-term exploitation of critical old-growth forests and promotes community vibrancy, Alaska Native cultures and food security. The Roadless Rule maximizes the economic, social and environmental sustainability of our Tribe and our region and must not be overturned.”

Mike Jones, President, Organized Village of Kasaan:

“The Roadless Rule has worked well for our Tribe and our community by helping to protect customary and traditional uses of our lands and waters, and the fish, wildlife, trees and plants. This helps us honor our ancestors and provide for current and future generations. The Roadless Rule must continue to be upheld across the Tongass National Forest.”

Wanda Culp (Tlingit), Tongass Hub Regional Coordinator, Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network (WECAN):

“The Tongass Forest is home to the ancient Tlingit and Haida Indigenous Nations.  It is where my ancestry originates, my bloodline is Indigenous to this land, its DNA is my DNA. The air we breathe, the water we depend on, the land we live upon, all pristine. This is why we need to ensure the Roadless Rule stays in place—to protect the forest from harmful interests and to ensure a liveable future for all generations.”

Judy Daxootsu Ramos (Tlingit from Yaakwdáat Kwáan (Yakutat, Alaska), Raven moiety, Kwáashk’ikwáan Clan) Board Co-Chair, Southeast Alaska Conservation Council:

“Southeast Alaska is the traditional homeland to the Tlingit, Haida and Tsimshian people and has been for thousands of years, but in the last 200 years, we’ve seen tremendous changes — I’ve seen it change drastically in my lifetime — the Roadless Rule is necessary to protect and respect our traditional homelands.”

Linda Behnken, commercial fisher and Executive Director, Alaska Longline Fishermen’s Association:

“The Roadless Rule is essential for protecting the remaining intact ecosystems within the Tongass National Forest for generations to come. It would be short-sighted and irresponsible to roll back these protections that support critical habitat for fish and wildlife, sustainable fisheries, and coastal fishing communities, especially as we endure threats posed by climate change and ocean warming.”

Hunter McIntosh, president and executive director, The Boat Company:

“The Boat Company operates small cruise vessels and is part of a growing regional ecotourism economy focused on outdoor recreation and adventure tourism. Ecotours are trips where visitors learn about and admire nature in ways that contribute to conservation and the economic well-being of local communities. By managing roadless areas for outdoor recreation, local communities benefit, and visitors emerge refreshed by the well-known physical and emotional benefits of forest recreation. By preserving intact forests, policies such as the Roadless Rule provide economic benefits that outweigh industrial, extractive uses and protect important ecosystem service values such as carbon storage and sequestration, and fisheries and wildlife.”

Captain Dan Blanchard, owner and CEO, Uncruise Adventures:

“Each year UnCruise Adventures provide hundreds of visitors with scenic views of southeast Alaska coastlines, fjords and forests, and remote recreation experiences such as hiking, kayaking, beach combing and wildlife viewing. I cannot understate the importance of inventoried roadless areas to the ecotour economy.  Our clients expect to see “wild” Alaska and prefer natural landscapes that support healthy and iconic wildlife species such as bears or bald eagles.  Clearcutting and timber road construction in inventoried roadless areas will force us to divert our travel routes and reduce shore-based activities to avoid seeing or being around clearcuts.  These changes would negatively affect Southeast Alaska’s reputation as an uncrowded and high-quality adventure travel destination free from industrial activities.”

Karlin Itchoak, senior regional director for Alaska, The Wilderness Society:

“Reinstating the Roadless Rule was a significant and long-awaited victory for the Tongass and it was a direct result of Tribes and Indigenous peoples of Southeast Alaska demanding the protections of their ancestral homeland. Attempts to roll back these protections disregard their undying efforts and pose significant threats to the communities that depend on this sustainable forest, as well as the wildlife and sacred old-growth forest now protected from harmful development. We stand in solidarity with local Alaska Native leaders in demanding that the Roadless Rule holds firm and the voices of Southeast Alaska are heard to ensure that the Tongass rainforest is protected for the preservation of culture and future generations to come.”

Andy Moderow, senior director of policy, Alaska Wilderness League:

“The Roadless Rule is common sense policy that puts people and public lands first. Reinstating those protections in the Tongass National Forest is at the foundation of efforts to build a sustainable future for Southeast Alaska.  It’s also a flexible rule, that allows for community access, hydropower infrastructure, utility connectors, and other projects when they serve a legitimate public interest.  We will keep defending this rule whenever it is attacked, so that future generations can count on the Tongass National Forest just like we can today.”

Nicole Whittington-Evans, Alaska Program director, Defenders of Wildlife:

“Protecting the Tongass National Forest is an important step in recognizing the role our forests play in fighting the biodiversity and climate crises. Tongass Roadless areas protect rare intact old-growth forest habitat for wildlife and help address climate change by sequestering carbon. Defenders will not waver in our support for protecting this irreplaceable habitat.”

Cooper Freeman, Alaska Representative, Center for Biological Diversity:

“I’m outraged the Dunleavy administration is trying to open up more logging in the country’s largest forest carbon sink in the midst of the climate and extinction crises. Protecting more than half the Tongass is one of the best ways we can preserve this irreplaceable old-growth forest for future generations. We’ll do everything we can to make sure the spectacular Tongass is protected.”

Hallie Templeton, legal director, Friends of the Earth:

“As the country’s largest national forest and carbon sink, protecting the Tongass is essential for local communities and for our global battle against climate change. This is one of our last remaining truly wild places, and it demands ultimate protection from corporate interests. We are proud to continue fighting alongside our tribal, local business, fishing, and conservation partners to ensure that the Tongass and its natural abundance remain off limits to industrial development.”

Background

Situated in the southeast corner of Alaska, the Tongass is a temperate rainforest and the ancestral homeland of the Tlingit, Haida, and Tsimshian peoples. The islands, fjords, glaciers, and muskegs that make up the nation’s largest national forest provide some of the most rare and intact ecosystems in the world, providing critical habitat for wildlife including salmon, brown and black bears, bald eagles, flying squirrels, goshawks, and Sitka black-tailed deer.

These lands are integral to the ways-of-life of Alaska Native people in the region, who depend on roadless areas for hunting, fishing, gathering traditional medicines, and cultural uses. In addition, the region supports a thriving tourism industry and a local, sustainable, commercial fishing industry. Both industries depend on the forest’s intact ecosystem. The Tongass also serves as the country’s largest forest carbon sink, making its protection critical for U.S. efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions and to set a global example.

Originally adopted in 2001, the Roadless Rule is one of the most significant conservation measures adopted to protect the national forests of the United States. Applicable nationwide, it prohibits industrial logging and most roadbuilding in intact areas of the national forest system, with a few exceptions. Alaska’s Tongass National Forest was protected under the national rule in 2001 but was exempted first under the Bush administration and later under the Trump Administration. During the recent Trump-era rollback in 2020, the public submitted nearly half a million comments. Of those, 96% advocated for keeping Roadless Rule protections in place for the Tongass, and only 1% supported the Trump exemption.

In January 2023, in a much-celebrated decision, the Biden administration reinstated the Roadless Rule for the Tongass, protecting the forest once again from logging and roadbuilding.

The following Tribes and groups, represented by Earthjustice and NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council), are intervening to protect the Roadless Rule: Organized Village of Kake, Hoonah Indian Association, Ketchikan Indian Community, Organized Village of Kasaan, Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network, The Boat Company, Uncruise, Alaska Longline Fishermen’s Association, Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, Alaska Wilderness League, Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife, Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth, the Wilderness Society and NRDC.

Communications contact: Brittany Miller, bmiller@foe.org, (202) 222-0746

The post Alaska Native Tribes, Southeast Alaska Businesses and Forest Advocates Defend Tongass National Forest’s Roadless Rule appeared first on Friends of the Earth.

The lawsuit was brought by Earthjustice on behalf of Defenders of Wildlife, Friends of the Earth, and Greenpeace USA, with the Center for Biological Diversity and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). The groups plan to file an appeal of the ruling to the Ninth Circuit. Environmental groups argue Interior’s approval failed to satisfy federal legal requirements. The court also ruled today on a second lawsuit, filed by Trustees for Alaska, challenging Willow on behalf of Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic and others.

The massive oil project would release carbon-dioxide emissions equivalent to that of driving two million extra cars for the next 30 years, while causing devastating harm to the environment, Arctic wildlife, and nearby people who depend on the land for subsistence.

Ahead of Interior’s approval of Willow, ConocoPhillips, the company behind the project, claimed to investors that the initiative would become the “next great Alaska hub” that could open as much as three billion additional barrels of oil in nearby prospects that can only be accessed with Willow infrastructure in place.

Willow sparked fierce opposition from millions, including a youth climate movement and leadership from the nearby village of Nuiqsut. Opponents expressed concerns that Willow significantly and symbolically undermined U.S. national climate goals of slashing carbon emissions 50 percent by 2030 and achieving net zero by 2050.

Groups issued the following statements:

“While today’s ruling is disappointing, we are entirely confident in our claims, and plan to appeal to the higher court,” said Erik Grafe, Deputy Managing Attorney in Earthjustice’s Alaska regional office. “Beyond the illegality of Willow’s approval, Interior’s decision to greenlight the project in the first place moved us in the opposite direction of our national climate goals in the face of the worsening climate crisis.”

“We are extremely disappointed in today’s decision, which will have tragic consequences for Arctic communities, wildlife, and our planet as a whole,” said Hallie Templeton, Legal Director at Friends of the Earth. “But the fight is far from over. We maintain confidence in our legal claims that Interior has unlawfully ignored the significant environmental harms stemming from Willow. We won’t stop until this climate disaster of a project is dead once and for all.”

“Although we are disappointed in today’s ruling, we will never stop fighting to protect Alaskan wildlife and landscapes from the Biden administration’s wrongheaded and unlawful decision to approve the Willow project,” said Nicole Whittington-Evans, Alaska program director at Defenders of Wildlife. “The Willow project is wholly incompatible with a clean, just energy future that protects polar bears, people, and the planet.”

Tim Donaghy, Research Manager at Greenpeace USA, said: “The science is crystal clear: we cannot afford any new oil and gas projects – much less a monster project like Willow – if we want to avoid the worst impacts of global warming. Today’s decision is a blow to everyone who spoke up and opposed this reckless project. The leadership of the Biden Administration is now more vital than ever. We call on President Biden to stop approving these disastrous projects that will only drive us further into climate catastrophe.”

“This is a really sad decision for Arctic wildlife and the climate,” said Kristen Monsell, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The Willow project poses a clear threat to people and ecosystems, but the Biden administration approved this carbon bomb without properly accounting for that potential damage. Willow will add massive fossil-fuel pollution to the atmosphere in the midst of a climate emergency and disrupt habitat for countless Arctic animals. We’ll do everything in our power to keep fighting this nonsensical harmful project.” 

“As the public has shown in its fierce outcry against Willow, business as usual for the fossil fuel industry is untenable in the midst of a warming planet,” said Bobby McEnaney, director of the dirty energy project at NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council). “Willow, which by design requires keeping the melting Arctic tundra cool just to enable drilling, symbolizes the absurdity and recklessness of expanded drilling in the Arctic. We’ll continue to urge Interior to take proactive, meaningful steps to avoid fossil fuel induced climate disaster in the Arctic.” 

Communications contact: Brittany Miller, bmiller@foe.org, (202) 222-0746

The post Alaska District Court Rules Willow Oil Project Can Proceed; Conservation Groups Plan To File Appeal appeared first on Friends of the Earth.

In March 2023, for example, the Biden Administration approved ConocoPhillips’ Willow Project, undermining his climate commitments by instilling an enormous new carbon emission source that will cause irreparable harm to Alaska’s communities, environment, and wildlife. The approval was met with a lawsuit from Friends of the Earth and other environmental groups who vehemently opposed the project, citing it will add about 260 million metric tons of carbon emissions into the atmosphere over the next 30 years, or the equivalent of an extra two million cars on the road per year. 

Raena Garcia, Senior Public Lands and Fossil Fuels Campaigner at Friends of the Earth, issued the following response: 

Today’s announcements, while appreciated, simply don’t go far enough to preserve our public lands. Lease sales like those in the ANWR that were put forth by the Trump Administration should have never happened in the first place. Small measures like the ones the Department of Interior put forward won’t erase President Biden’s incredibly disappointing climate record with respect to oil and gas leasing. If the Administration is truly committed to protecting our people and the planet, they will halt climate-destroying projects like Willow altogether.

COMMUNICATIONS CONTACT: Erika Seiber, eseiber@foe.org 

The post Friends of the Earth Responds to Interior’s Announcements for Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve and Arctic National Wildlife Refuge appeared first on Friends of the Earth.

Throughout his career, Verner sought to bring the rights, voices and concerns of Indigenous Peoples to the forefront of climate and environmental action in Alaska and beyond. Verner’s infectious smile and magnetic personality inspired colleagues, partners and communities throughout the world. The experience and knowledge Verner brought to international spaces and forums made him an influential speaker and educator on Arctic issues and environmental degradation. Verner’s joyful presence and legacy stretch across the globe through the expansive network he built of Indigenous, environmental and climate activists. 

Verner served at Friends of the Earth for five years, applying his passion toward protecting Arctic communities from environmental degradation from shipping, cruising and mining operations. Before joining Friends of the Earth’s staff, Verner partnered with the organization to further Indigenous representation at the International Maritime Organization. And in 2021, with partners, he helped win a seat at the table for Arctic Indigenous voices and issues. 

Verner also held cruise companies accountable for their environmental degradation in communities across Alaska and the Pacific Northwest. He worked to improve fishing regulations to reduce impacts to endangered salmon and improve Southern Resident orca health, and fought to protect his beloved Bristol Bay from harmful mining operations like the Pebble Mine — a fight he was engaged in his entire adult life.  

“Verner was a fierce advocate for the protection of our environment in his community of Bristol Bay and the larger world,” said Marcie Keever, Oceans and vessels program director at Friends of the Earth. “We have lost a bright light in our movement, and we will endeavor to continue Verner’s work to elevate Indigenous voices and stand up for people, our climate and our environment.” 

“The passion, care and intention Verner modeled touched so many lives within the climate and environmental movement and beyond,” said Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth. “Our thoughts are with Verner’s family as they mourn. Verner’s heart for Alaska was reflected in every meeting, every project and every partnership. Friends of the Earth will continue to fight to protect the people and places Verner loved.” 

Donations and support in honor of Verner’s legacy can be sent to: United Tribes of Bristol Bay, PO Box 1252 Dillingham, AK 99576 (please put Verner Wilson in the memo). 

The post Honoring the Legacy of Verner Wilson III appeared first on Friends of the Earth.

The 17 million-acre Tongass National Forest, situated in the southeast corner of Alaska, is a temperate rainforest that draws visitors from around the globe and provides habitat for an abundance of wildlife including grizzly bears, bald eagles, and wolves. It is the ancestral homeland of the Tlingit, Haida, and Tsimshian peoples. The Tongass also serves as the country’s largest forest carbon sink, making its protection critical for U.S. efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions and to set a global example.

The following statements were issued in response to today’s news:

President Joel Jackson, Organized Village of Kake:

“The Tongass Roadless Rule is important to everyone. The old-growth timber is a carbon sink, one of the best in the world. It’s important to OUR WAY OF LIFE — the streams, salmon, deer, and all the forest animals and plants.”

Gloria Burns, Vice President with the Ketchikan Indian Community Tribal Council:

“The Tongass National forest has provided for the people of this land since time immemorial and in many ways, the forest is the lungs of the world. The reinstatement of the Roadless Rule is an important step.  I come from a family of weavers and we rely culturally, spiritually and economically on a thriving and healthy old growth forest. As a Tribe we agreed to join litigation around the Roadless Rule because the federal government did not consult with Tribes regarding the issue and we have concerns as we belong to and rely on the land to sustain our families and culture. We will be here in this place until the end of time and our cultures depend on and revolve around our natural world.”

Naawéiyaa Tagaban, Environmental Justice Strategy Lead, Native Movement:

“The restoration of National Roadless Rule protections for the Tongass National Forest is a great first step in honoring the voices of the many Tribal Governments and Tribal Citizens who spoke out in favor of Roadless Rule protections for the Tongass. We are grateful to the Biden administration for taking this first step toward long-term protections for the Tongass. We hope that going forward true long-term protections will be established that do not rely on a rule which can be changed at the whim of a presidential administration. The administration must look to Tribal Sovereignty and Indigenous stewardship as the true long-term solution for protections in the Tongass. Tlingit, Haida, and Tsimshian people have lived in and managed the Tongass national forest for generations, true protections will look like the restoration of lands into Indigenous ownership.”

Wanda Culp, Tongass Coordinator, Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network:

“The Tongass Forest is homeland to countless indigenous family species, intertwined as strong and delicate as a spider’s circular web. The Tongass National Forest in Alaska is a national treasure, stored wealth, as is each of America’s Public Forests. They should always be handled as the treasures they are — cherished and saved to enable our future generations to breathe fresh air. To BREATHE FREELY!”

Linda Behnken, commercial fisherman and Executive Director, Alaska Longline Fishermen’s Association:

“We are thrilled and relieved to know the Tongass’ remaining unroaded areas will remain intact vibrant forests for generations to come. Our fisheries depend on healthy habitat, and with climate change driving ocean warming, protecting habitat is increasingly important to the fish, the fisheries, and the coastal fishing communities. This is welcome news!”

Captain Dan Blanchard, owner and CEO, Uncruise Adventures:

“As an Alaska small business owner, I am ecstatic that the Forest Service is fully reinstating the Roadless Rule in the Tongass National Forest. It is time for us to focus on recreational opportunities for locals and visitors alike. The visitor industry is huge to the SE Alaska economy. Visitors travel from every corner of the planet to explore the rare environment and wildlife that is the Tongass National Forest. Happy Day!”

Mike and Sally Trotter, owners, Baranof Wilderness Lodge:

“GO JOE! Thank you so much for your support, stewardship, and care for this precious and wonderful planet earth! We honor your path.”

Above & Beyond Alaska:

“As a company that has been operating wilderness trips in the Tongass National Forest for over 20 years, we are overjoyed that the Roadless Rule will be restored to help protect this national treasure and to ensure healthy ecosystems continue to thrive in Southeast Alaska.”

Kevin Murphy, owner, Murphy’s Maritime Services:

“As a business owner in Southeast Alaska, reinstating the Roadless Rule allows me to continue to take visitors from around the world to experience an intact ecosystem filled with salmon, wildlife, and old-growth forests — not clearcuts. It’s no wonder Juneau gets more than a million visitors a year.”

Teague Whalen, owner and operator, Tongass Teague:

“There are two uncompromising realities for the survival of life on this planet: clean air and clean water. My hiking tours into the Tongass begin at the literal end of our road, where the Roadless Rule reinstatement will ensure that the Tongass can continue to be a lasting carbon sink.”

Stephen Van Derhoff, owner, Spirit Walker Expeditions:

“We are elated — literally floating on the news that the Roadless Rule is being reinstated in the Tongass. As we kayak, hike, and camp our way through this incredible ecosystem, we’re thankful for its protection and stewardship — and grateful for the opportunity to share the wilds of Southeast Alaska with guests from around the globe.”

Andy Moderow, Alaska Director, Alaska Wilderness League:

“We applaud today’s announcement, because it recognizes that Southeast Alaska’s future is rooted in sustainable uses of the forest. The Roadless Rule protects Tongass old-growth while also providing flexibility for community access, hydropower projects, utility connectors and other economic development projects when they serve a legitimate public interest.  This decision puts public lands and people first, and we are grateful for the action.”

Patrick Lavin, Alaska policy advisor, Defenders of Wildlife:

“Protecting the Tongass National Forest is an important step in recognizing the role of our forests in fighting the biodiversity and climate crises. Today’s action helps restore responsible stewardship in the Tongass, as demanded by an overwhelming majority of people during the public process. We look forward to working with the Biden administration to similarly protect older forests and wildlands across the nation.”

Kate Glover, Senior Attorney, Earthjustice:

“We applaud the Forest Service for making good on its commitment to tribes and to the climate by restoring the Roadless Rule across the Tongass. This is great news for the forest, the salmon, the wildlife, and the people who depend on intact ecosystems to support their ways of life and livelihoods.”

Ellen Montgomery, Research and Policy Center Public Lands Campaign Director, Environment America:

“After eagerly awaiting this announcement, we’re overjoyed that full roadless protections have been restored to the Tongass National Forest. Our largest national forest provides critical habitat for countless birds, salmon and its ancient trees absorb staggering amounts of carbon. The roadless area, 9.2 million acres, has been protected from logging since 2001. Thanks to the Biden administration, this critical forestland will have continued protection for decades longer. Now that this Trump era rollback has been restored, it’s time for the Biden administration to move to increase protection from logging for all old and mature forests across the entire country.”

Hallie Templeton, Legal Director, Friends of the Earth:

“We are proud to stand in victory alongside our Alaskan neighbors and other partners. Today marks yet another reversal of Trump-era attempts to gut conservation policies in the name of profits. Our message is loud and clear: we won’t allow such lawless behavior. We will keep watching and fighting in the name of conservation and environmental justice.”

Garett Rose, Staff Attorney, Alaska Project, NRDC:

“The Forest Service deserves a lot of praise for today’s move. The region’s Native peoples depend on this vast wildland, and the public overwhelmingly wants it protected. The Tongass is a refuge for animals that are endangered in other places, not to mention five species of salmon. We need to keep old-growth forests like these intact all around the globe—and soon—to sharply reduce carbon emissions. A key next step for the Biden administration would be protecting mature forests across all federal lands here in the U.S.”

Alex Craven, Senior Campaign Representative, Sierra Club:

“The Tongass is often referred to as ‘our nation’s climate forest’ for its ability to store carbon and protect us from the worst impacts of climate change. Thanks to today’s reinstatement of the Roadless Rule in Alaska, millions of acres of this valuable ecosystem will once again be protected – as will its supply of clean water, critical wildlife habitat, and carbon stores. We are proud to stand with Indigenous leaders and local Alaskans who have been championing the effort to restore these critical protections.”

Meredith Trainor, Executive Director, Southeast Alaska Conservation Council:

All of us at the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council and across Southeast Alaska are celebrating today’s announcement. This long-awaited decision by the Biden administration will protect over 9 million acres of Tongass National Forest Land for years to come. Hundreds of thousands of Alaskans and Americans wrote, lobbied, rallied, and petitioned for the National Roadless Rule to stay in place on the Tongass, and thanks to the Biden administration and leadership from Southeast Alaska’s Tribal communities, we have finally succeeded. Today’s win is the work of hundreds and thousands of hands and voices, all lifted up to protect this most precious place that we love – the Tongass National Forest.

Dominick A. DellaSala, Ph. D. Chief Scientist, Wild Heritage:

“The Tongass’ towering old-growth rainforests are tops among all national forests, and its roadless areas are 16% of the nation’s total. Even more impressive is this single national forest, the nation’s largest, stores the equivalent of 20% of all the carbon in the entire national forest system, making it North America’s best nature-based climate solution. What a glorious decision for Alaskans and all those that care about a safe climate and our natural legacy.”

Meda DeWitt, Senior Specialist, Alaska, The Wilderness Society:

“This is a long-awaited victory for the Tongass and for the Tlingit people. Through the leadership of the Indigenous peoples of Southeast Alaska, we have made our voices heard and will see over nine million acres of ancestral homeland and invaluable old-growth forest protected from harmful development. While we are grateful to the Biden Administration for taking decisive action in reinstating the 2001 Roadless Rule, we must continue to listen to the voices of Southeast Alaska and ensure that this forest is protected for the preservation of culture and future generations to come.”

Osprey Orielle Lake, Executive Director, Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network (WECAN):

“After years of collective advocacy, we are celebrating this decision to protect the Tongass Rainforest and our global climate. Old-growth and mature forests are vital to climate mitigation, and we must take action to support protection of all old-growth forests like the Tongass, while we particularly listen to the leadership of Indigenous peoples when their forest homelands and territories are under attack. We look forward to the Tongass remaining protected for current and future generations, and to uplifting Indigenous leadership.”

Ted Zukoski, senior attorney, Center for Biological Diversity:

“What a fantastic day for the old trees of the Tongass, Southeast Alaska communities, wildlife and our climate. We’re in the midst of climate and wildlife extinction crises and the Tongass is a lifeline for our planet. The wild, mature and old-growth forests on the Tongass are carbon-storing champions that are worth more standing. It’s crucial that the Biden administration is stepping up to protect them from logging.”

Background

In October 2020, the Trump administration canceled application of the nationwide Roadless Rule to the 9 million acres of Southeast Alaska’s 17-million-acre Tongass National Forest it previously protected. The public submitted nearly half a million comments during the federally required public process The Forest Service analyzed a subset of the comments, finding 96% supporting keeping the Roadless Rule in force on the Tongass, and only 1% supporting the exemption ultimately selected by the Trump administration.

Originally adopted in 2001, the Roadless Rule is one of the most significant conservation measures adopted to protect the national forests of the United States. Applicable nationwide, it prohibits industrial logging and most road-building in intact areas of the national forest system, with a few exceptions. Alaska’s Tongass National Forest was protected under the national rule in 2001, but was exempted first under the Bush administration and later under the Trump Administration. Today’s decision puts the Roadless Rule back in place across the Tongass, protecting its nine million acres of roadless areas from logging and road-building.

On June 11, 2021, the Biden administration announced it would “repeal or replace” the so-called Alaska-specific Roadless Rule.

Communications contact: Brittany Miller, bmiller@foe.org, (202) 222-0746

The post U.S. Forest Service restores critical protections to Tongass National Forest appeared first on Friends of the Earth.

The plans were submitted by Emerald House, a subsidiary of Australian petroleum firm 88 Energy. After drilling an initial oil well labeled “Merlin-1” in the winter of 2020/2021, the company told investors it believed the remote and undeveloped public-lands area where it intends to drill could contain 1.6 billion barrels of petroleum. If that proves true, extracting and burning that total volume would release 645 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, according to expert analysis. By comparison, ConocoPhillips’ Willow project – which has attracted significant opposition from climate advocates – would release an estimated 275 million metric tons of CO2.

The lawsuit alleges that the Biden administration violated the National Environmental Policy Act by failing to analyze the greenhouse gas emissions consequences of allowing this project to move forward when issuing a permit, particularly given the existing climate impacts arising from fossil fuel projects already underway on federal lands. 

“We are beyond frustrated with Biden’s rubber stamping of Big Oil’s drilling in Alaska’s vulnerable and wild places,” said Hallie Templeton, Legal Director for Friends of the Earth. “Unfortunately, the administration failed to see how this unlawful decision throws yet another carbon bomb at our rapidly warming planet. We hope the court system helps ensure that the federal government fully upholds our bedrock environmental laws before approving such harmful activities.”

“You can’t fight climate change and expand fossil fuel projects in the Arctic at the same time. Adding more drilling projects in Alaska’s Western Arctic is both reckless and counterproductive,” said Tim Donaghy, Research Manager for Greenpeace USA. “We must follow the dictates of science and justice. President Biden has a change to build on his recent climate wins with policies to phase out fossil fuel production, and ensure an energy transition that benefits workers and communities.”

“The Biden administration has made important strides on climate, but continuing to green-light new oil drilling projects threatens to undermine this progress and push our climate goals out of reach,” said Sierra Club Lands Water Wildlife Campaign Director Dan Ritzman. “The Peregrine program could open the door to even further industrialization of this sensitive area,  threatening our climate, as well as critical wildlife habitat. We will continue fighting in court to ensure that it never moves forward.”  

“We are in the middle of a climate crisis that is causing massive environmental disruptions and harm to communities around the globe, yet the Trump and Biden administrations have moved this exploration program forward without any meaningful analysis of how its greenhouse gas emissions will contribute to climate change,” said Earthjustice attorney Ian Dooley. “Continuing down this path will thwart any meaningful progress toward addressing climate change, so we’re going to court to force BLM to rethink its decision to allow this fossil fuel proposal to move forward.”

The full complaint is available here.

Communications contact: Brittany Miller, (202) 222-0746, bmiller@foe.org

The post Lawsuit targeting Arctic drilling challenges Biden administration to think long-term on climate appeared first on Friends of the Earth.

Summary
The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is many things at once: It makes Big Polluters pay more than they have in a generation; It is a doubling-down on the disastrous status quo for oil and gas leasing; It is an investment in renewables designed to support good paying jobs, domestic supply chains, and historically marginalized communities; And it is a lifeline to blue hydrogen, carbon capture, and other fossil fuel industry scams. The good and the bad all need to be considered together.

THE GOOD

Superfund Tax
The Superfund Program to remediate legacy contamination sites was always predicated on the simple principle that polluters should pay for their own messes. When the program was first established in 1980, this principle was reflected in the three taxes through which the program was funded: A per barrel excise tax on oil refiners, an excise tax on chemical producers, and a 0.12% income tax on polluting industries. Unsurprisingly, when the taxes all expired in 1996, the budget for the program began to shrink without a dedicated source of revenue. 
The situation changed in 2021, when the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill restored the tax on chemicals. Now, the IRA is proposing to restore and nearly double the tax on refiners from 9.4 cents per barrel to 16.9 cents, boosting funding for remediation and sending Big Oil an estimated tax increase of $11.7 billion. If the IRA becomes law, this will be the single biggest targeted tax increase on oil and gas since 2005.

National Green Bank
Sec. 60103 “Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund” provides nearly $30 billion for what advocates are dubbing a National Green Bank. This includes funds to states, municipalities, tribal governments, and certain nonprofits (that provide capital) which, in turn, will provide grants, loans, other forms of financial assistance, and technical assistance for zero emissions technologies and projects that reduce or avoid greenhouses gasses (GHGs), with a priority on low income and disadvantaged communities. 

In theory, these funds could support green financing by public banks that Friends of the Earth (FOE) and allies have been campaigning to establish in California and other states. Funds could also potentially support local Community Development Financial Institutions, which have been increasingly interested in funding projects that help low income and disadvantaged communities respond to climate change.

If enacted, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will administer the Fund. As with many aspects of the IRA, definitional and operational details will need to be encouraged, supported, and watchdogged.

Green Ports
The IRA includes billions of dollars in spending to lessen air pollution from port-related activities, thereby improving air quality and reducing climate-warming emissions. The main provision being $3 billion in Clean Ports Investment. These funds would be used to purchase zero-emission equipment or technology, plan for such purchases, or develop climate action plans in order to reduce air pollution at ports (Sec. 60102).

In addition, the following provisions could be applied to ports or port-adjacent communities:

• $1 billion for Clean Heavy-Duty Vehicles grants and rebates for the purchase of zero-emission trucks (Sec. 60101)
• $60 million in Diesel Emissions Reduction funds to identify and reduce diesel emissions resulting from goods movement operations in low-income communities (Sec. 60104)
• $117.5 million to Address Air Pollution funding to deploy, integrate, support, and maintain various air monitoring stations (Sec. 60105)
• $50 million in Multipollutant Monitoring Stations grants to expand monitoring networks and to maintain existing monitors (Sec. 60105)
• $3 million in Air Quality Sensors in Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities grants for air quality sensors in these communities (Sec. 60105)
• $50 million for Addressing Air Pollution at Schools funding to monitor and reduce air pollution at schools in low-income and disadvantaged communities (Sec. 60106)
• $3.045 billion for a Neighborhood Access and Equity Grant Program grants for community development (Sec. 60501)
• $5 billion for a Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Program funds for reducing greenhouse gasses (Sec. 60114)
• $3 billion for an Environmental and Climate Justice Grant Program community-focused funding to combat environmental and climate threats (Sec. 60201)

Renewable Energy
Renewable energy tax credits have existed in various forms for decades. Never permanent parts of the tax code and often extended temporarily as part of last minute deals, the 30% investment tax credit (ITC) for solar and the $15 per mwh production tax credit (PTC) for wind have nonetheless been the most generous and effective federal incentives for clean renewables. The IRA is poised to change this system significantly, and for the better.

The IRA would offer a decade of incentives for wind, solar, and storage technologies. Beginning in 2025, any zero-emission power source would be eligible to opt for a new “technology neutral” option with the opportunity to apply either the PTC or the ITC to new projects. Most important of all, it would create a new system of “adders” designed to steer the renewable energy economy towards justice. The full value of the credit will only kick in if projects are built with workers paid at the prevailing wage. If projects are constructed with inputs from US manufacturers or in historically marginalized communities, the value of the credit can be increased by an additional (and stackable) ten percent each.

Unfortunately, these new provisions to harness renewable tax credits for justice do not include the vital mechanism of direct pay. A tax credit worth $100 is only useful to someone with a tax bill of $100 or more. What direct pay does is allow for the value of the credit to be treated as a tax refund — in other words, as a direct infusion of cash.

Although direct pay featured prominently in versions of Build Back Better negotiated in 2021, it has been narrowed significantly in the IRA so that only entities without tax obligations like churches and co-ops can utilize it. This is certain to foster continued dependence on something called the tax equity market. In essence, financial institutions provide equity investments in eligible projects and in exchange claim the credits for themselves. The result is a handful of rentier Wall Street mega-banks delaying the deployment of wind and solar while netting a handsome tax windfall for themselves. This could have been prevented with a more robust commitment to direct pay–a possibility that Manchin himself foreclosed.

THIS SHOULD BE BETTER

Environmental Justice Provisions
The bill contains funding for environmental and climate justice activities. While fact sheets from the Senate Majority Leaders office calculates $60 billion in funding for Environmental Justice (EJ), other analyses by the Indigenous Environmental Network, the Climate and Community Project and the Just Solutions Collective calculate less funding. There are also definitional concerns in the bill over what qualifies as EJ funding as well as who is eligible to receive the funding. More broadly, with a generous accounting of $60 billion, there is deep disappointment that more resources are not available for communities that have been both deeply scarred by the fossil fuel economy and perpetually forgotten.

Additionally, we have deep concerns that the EJ provisions appear to provide a very limited spend down window for investments in low income and disadvantaged communities while fossil fuel, nuclear, and renewable provisions extend the entire length of the bill. 

Inadequate Leasing Reforms
The IRA contains a suite of economic reforms to the leasing program that FOE generally supports from a taxpayer fairness angle. However, pro-fossil fuel and centrist voices have argued that these economic reforms to the leasing program should replace efforts for comprehensive changes to the leasing program, which FOE adamantly opposes. 

Royalty Rates
The bill raises the minimum royalty rate for offshore oil and gas leases from 12.5% to 16.66%, with a cap at 18.75% while shallow water lease royalty rates would rise to at least 16.66%. Current royalty rates for deepwater leases are already at 18.75% and would be prevented from raising any further. While these adjustments begin to address taxpayer fairness issues, they are not nearly high enough to have any real impact on production or climate emissions. The text also attempts to limit the ability of the Interior Department (Interior) to raise rates further.

Rental Rates
Additionally, minimum rental rates would be raised to $3/acre per year for 2 years, $5/acre per year for 6 years, and $15/acre per year thereafter. Reinstated leases would have rental rates raised to $20/acre per year. Again, these changes begin to address taxpayer fairness issues, but are not sufficient to address climate concerns.

Noncompetitive Leasing
Currently, parcels of public lands that receive no bids during competitive auctions can be scooped up by industry for a little as $1.50 per acre. The IRA ends this practice, which will help stem the tide of public lands falling into the hands of industry and allow Interior to manage lands for other purposes. However, much of the land that is leased non-competitively has a low potential of actually being developed.

Methane Royalties
All leases will include an unspecified royalty on extracted methane. This will generate revenue and, when combined with EPA regulations, help discourage unmitigated flaring and methane pollution. However, there are exceptions for gas vented or flared in emergency situations, used or consumed within the area of the lease, or routine burn-off — coined as “unavoidably” lost by the industry.

Bonding Requirements
We are glad that the minimum bonding requirements, money companies must set aside before drilling to pay for cleanup, would be raised to $150,000 for individual, $500,000 for statewide, and $2 million for nationwide with an adjustment for inflation required at least every four years. This will help shift the burden for cleanup from taxpayers to industry.

THE BAD

Nuclear Energy
One of the most unfortunate provisions of the IRA is an industry-wide rescue of the country’s aging and increasingly uneconomical nuclear fleet. At an estimated cost in revenue of $30 billion over nine years, the bailout would take the form of a production tax credit (PTC) worth $15 per megawatt-hour (MWh) that would begin to phase out for reactor revenue above $25 per mwh.

This is some of the worst spent money in the entire bill for the simple reason that the nuclear industry already got a bailout in 2021. As part of Manchin’s bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), $6 billion was set aside for economically distressed reactors whose premature closure might increase emissions. Eligible reactors would be able to “bid” for subsidies to stay online and payments would be prioritized based on where operations could continue most cheaply. Although far from perfect, the policy is a fair answer to the nuclear question: Targeted, means-tested subsidies only when old nukes can’t be replaced quickly enough with new renewables.

In contrast, the PTC is a blatant cash grab likely to steer billions towards a handful of profitable corporations. It won’t reduce emissions and it likely won’t even prevent any imminent reactor closures. With the shuttering of Palisades in Michigan earlier this year and the planned retirement of the two reactors at Diablo Canyon in California, only two more reactors are even scheduled to be relicensed between now and 2028. Constellation and Energy Harbor, the biggest potential beneficiaries, will net billions, but no emissions increases will be prevented that existing policy couldn’t prevent more cheaply and efficiently.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
The IRA would supercharge one of Big Oil’s favorite giveaways: The 45Q tax credit for carbon capture and sequestration. This subsidy will now award $85 per ton for underground storage and $60 per metric ton for enhanced oil recovery, a sharp increase from the current levels of $50 and $35 per ton, respectively. This expansion would occur without addressing the long pattern of 45Q fraud and the underlying uncertainty of carbon storage leaking. 

Perhaps most problematically of all, the new 45Q would establish weak requirements for qualifying projects. For example, in the power sector it requires a unit design capability of at least 75% capture. Since actual capture rates are commonly much lower than the touted maximum capability, this is a potentially major loophole. Arguably, utilities with CCS units within the qualifying design capacity would be incentivized to minimize any shortfall by the tax credit itself. However, the fact remains that the only way to ensure that 45Q only subsidizes CCS with at least 75% capture rate in real operating conditions is to require that CCS achieves that capture rate. This language did not happen by accident and shows that even fossil interests aren’t confident in the ability of CCS to meet even the already weak requirements of 45Q.

The standards for capture in the industrial sector are even weaker, only requiring a minimum  12,500 metric tons of capture with no minimum capture percentage. One of the biggest expected winners of this new low standard is the ethanol industry.

This highly subsidized liquid biofuel made predominantly from corn starch has long been a driver of harmful farming practices and the resulting product is often worse for the climate than gasoline. Despite this, ethanol producers are poised to rake in massive federal subsidies under the guise of being a ‘clean’ transportation fuel. Ethanol production is easier to pair with carbon capture, as it is substantially cheaper to capture some amount of carbon while producing ethanol than it is while burning fossil fuels. CCS in ethanol production costs between $25-35 per ton of carbon, meaning ethanol producers can cover their costs and still make up to $60 in pure profit off the 45Q tax credit. Biomass advocates included the 45Q changes in their victory lap about biofuel subsidies in IRA, and over 30 new ethanol CCS projects are in the wings, ready to cash-in on this credit. 

Hydrogen
The IRA includes a new $13 billion PTC for ‘clean’ hydrogen, an umbrella term that bundles hydrogen produced from fossil gas with CCS, renewables, nuclear, and biomass. Although the hydrogen PTC outlined in the IRA certainly subscribes to the erratic ‘all of the above’ philosophy that characterizes this bill, its structure is a moderate improvement over previous subsidies for “clean” hydrogen, including the billions in fossil-based giveaways Manchin included in last year’s bipartisan infrastructure bill. 

Crucially, the PTC requires a lifecycle analysis of the carbon intensity of hydrogen production, rather than the mere facility-level analysis required for Manchin’s $8 billion hydrogen hub program. However, the implementation of lifecycle analysis will likely not disqualify fossil-based blue hydrogen from the lowest tier of the subsidy. The upstream emission leakage of fossil gas is frequently underestimated in models, such as ANL’s GREET model which assumes a methane leakage rate of slightly over 1% rather than the more realistic 3.5%. Nevertheless, even with this underestimation of upstream emissions, blue hydrogen would have to achieve approximately 80% capture rates to qualify for the lowest tier of PTC, $0.12 per kg of hydrogen or $0.60 with the labor multiplier.

Renewably produced green hydrogen and nuclear pink hydrogen would likely qualify for the full PTC of $0.60 per kg of hydrogen or $3 per kg of hydrogen with the labor multiplier. This reverses the highly problematic equal treatment of green and blue hydrogen in Manchin’s earlier bipartisan bill — an approach that effectively skews the market towards the currently cheaper blue hydrogen technology, despite the dramatically better climate outcome from green hydrogen. The economics of the hydrogen PTC tiers will likely continue to shift in favor of green hydrogen over time if the Department of Energy (DOE) Hydrogen Shot (and other countries’ similar initiatives) successfully brings green hydrogen costs below $1 per kg in the next decade and if the volatility of fossil fuel prices continues to drive up the cost of blue hydrogen.

An important caveat is that blue hydrogen production will be able to qualify for either the PTC or 45Q. At first glance the PTC will be much more lucrative, allowing producers to earn up to $600 per metric ton of hydrogen. However, this will require high capture rates — approximately 80% capture — and must account for upstream and downstream leakages. A friendlier approach for blue hydrogen producers may be  the 45Q tax credit, which would allow a facility just barely ineligible for the PTC to claim as much as $0.50 per kg of hydrogen. Although less than the PTC, the barriers to entry for higher emitting blue hydrogen projects would be lower. This is because under 45Q the carbon intensity of the hydrogen would be irrelevant and to qualify producers would only need to reach the very low minimum annual capture requirement of 12,500 metric tons.  

In a notable deviation from the renewable tax credits, hydrogen and CCS will benefit from direct pay options. Project developers can opt for full direct pay for five years, then a gradual direct pay phase out over seven years. This makes hydrogen and CCS more attractive and accessible for project developers and operators — unlike with the renewable PTC. If the hydrogen PTC or the 45Q credit exceeds their tax liability, they are eligible for a tax refund. This is a clear favoring of fossil fuels over renewables.

Oil & Gas Leasing
Fossil fuel extraction on public lands accounts for nearly 25% of U.S. climate emissions. This is before we consider the impacts of emissions from offshore extraction. Overhauling the federal fossil fuel leasing program was one of the few actions President Biden could take without Congress to meaningfully reduce emissions from the oil and gas industry. The IRA attempts to tie the Biden administration’s hands by mandating sales move forward, including sales previously canceled by the administration, and attempts to validate leases from a sale that has been vacated by a federal court. This undermines public participation and our bedrock environmental laws. 

Perhaps most troubling is the way the IRA perpetuates the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska’s Cook Inlet as sacrifice zones. The IRA mandates reinstating offshore oil and gas leases on 1.7 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico, disregarding a court’s vacatur of the sale, and attempts to force additional sales forward in these two regions, where people of color and Indigenous peoples have been enduring harm from the fossil fuel industry for generations. The bill also fails to reinstate protections for the Arctic Refuge, which were included in previous packages. All of this injustice has been committed without any opportunity for feedback or input from impacted communities on the frontlines of the climate crisis. 

Perhaps most concerning is that the IRA ties the development of renewable energy on public lands and waters to the continued development of fossil fuel resources for the next decade. This faulty addition to the IRA has nothing to do with appropriations or spending, and should be uncoupled by the Parliamentarian prior to a vote. These disturbing provisions essentially mandate that renewables carry the fossil fuel industry on their back. Biden promised to end new fossil fuel leasing on public lands and waters. Congress is substantially delaying a just transition for impacted communities who have been living with the harms of fossil fuel production for generations. The IRA prohibits offshore wind development until Interior first holds an offshore oil and gas lease sale totaling at least 60 million acres. It also prohibits onshore renewable energy development until Interior has completed at least one offshore oil and gas lease sale within the previous quarter, and must be either less than 2 million acres or 50% of the land nominated by industry. Further, any acceptable bids must result in a lease being issued, undermining Interior’s ability to make decisions on the appropriate management of public lands.

“Permitting Reform” Side Deal
Behind closed doors, members of Congress are currently working up an additional bill that is closely connected to this package. This forthcoming bill is expected to streamline a slew of dirty energy projects, from pipelines to fossil fuel development, including gutting the full application of federal conservation laws like the National Environmental Policy Act and the Clean Water Act. Not only would this place the climate and vulnerable ecosystems at substantial risk, but it would rob communities of their voice and role in the administrative process and decision-making. Even with renewable energy, this streamlined push is a dangerous one. We need to treat new technology with great care to ensure it’s done right. The bill would also attempt to expedite court processes, limit the court’s ability to provide adequate remedies for unlawful agency action, and undercut agencies ability to fully comply with court orders to correct unlawful action.

Regardless of what happens to the IRA, any and all attacks on our bedrock environmental laws must be defeated.

Agriculture

Summary
The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) includes $20 billion in agriculture spending to mitigate climate change, including:

• $3.25 billion for the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP). CSP pays farmers for implementing conservation activities like cover crops, rotational grazing, and transitioning to organic farming. Despite being the largest federal conservation program by acreage, it is heavily oversubscribed so increased funding, especially for conservation activities that mitigate GHG emissions, will help more producers participate in this effective program.
• $8.45 billion for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). EQIP is another voluntary conservation program that provides technical and financial support to producers implementing conservation practices. Unfortunately, a significant portion of EQIP funds support practices that do not reduce GHG emissions and fund highly polluting Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) that are actively making the climate crisis worse. Meanwhile, thousands of farmers applying for money for beneficial practices are turned away. If Congress does not focus this funding on effective practices and limit subsidies to CAFOs in the 2023 Farm Bill, this additional support for EQIP will have a mixed impact.
• $1 billion for the Natural Resources Conservation Service to provide technical assistance on conservation to producers. If focused on the most effective conservation practices, this additional funding could have a significant positive impact.
• $300 million to carry out a carbon sequestration and greenhouse gas emissions quantification program. While quantifying the carbon sequestration and GHG reduction benefits associated with various practices is a good thing, the provision provides no guidelines for who can receive this money, opening the door for dubious projects led by large agribusinesses.
• $6.75 billion for the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), which is a dramatic increase to this program designed to address natural resource challenges at a regional scale. While additional funding could yield tremendous benefits, the IRA provisions could also allow USDA to set up carbon markets for methane and nitrous oxide emissions, a counterproductive measure.    

Unfortunately, the IRA also includes additional subsidies and tax breaks for so-called “biofuels” and “biogas” infrastructure, including support for factory farmed methane gas. Not only do biofuels compete with food production for land and water, they also increase fertilizer and pesticide use, water pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions. In the case of biofuels generated from factory farms, these provisions provide yet another subsidy to CAFOs, further entrenching this unsustainable model of agriculture.

What’s Next
Our food and agriculture system accounts for around a third of global greenhouse gas emissions and is the largest source of U.S. methane emissions. Increased conservation spending (as envisaged in the IRA) is critical to curtail agriculture-related GHG emissions and achieve U.S. climate goals. However, unless this new funding is spent on effective conservation practices, coupled with adequate oversight and guardrails, these programs could actually do more harm than good. To ensure these investments have the intended effect, Congress must:

• Require that USDA prioritize conservation funding for high-impact ecological management practices (e.g. cover cropping, nutrient management, filter strips, and conservation tillage) that have been found to be most effective in reducing GHG emissions, air and water pollution;
• Prevent USDA from setting up carbon markets, which generate negligible climate benefits while allowing industry to continue polluting and harming frontline communities;
• Prevent conservation subsidies from going to CAFOs other than to support a transition to well-managed pasture-based animal production or production of plant-based foods; and
• Insofar as conservation subsidies go to CAFOs, impose safeguards such as requiring recipients of funding to limit herd size expansion and adopt the best available technologies to mitigate pollution from CAFOs.

The post The Climate & Agriculture provisions of the IRA appeared first on Friends of the Earth.

‘Harassment’ is a fancy legal way of saying that an action can disturb or injure polar bears,” said Nicole Schmitt, executive director of Alaska Wildlife Alliance. “This Fish and Wildlife Service rule allows oil and gas companies to harass almost half of the polar bears left in the Southern Beaufort Sea population, double the harassment that occurred under the last regulation. Mind you, these polar bears have already declined by 40 percent in the past few decades and continue to face habitat loss.”

The Alaska Oil and Gas Association asked the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to allow oil and gas operators in Alaska to harass polar bears and walruses in the Beaufort Sea and on the North Slope during a range of oil and gas activities, including exploration, construction, extraction, and transportation.

“The regulation absolutely defies the Marine Mammal Protection Act and violates multiple other laws by allowing the harassment of nearly half the population of these already threatened polar bears,” said Bridget Psarianos, attorney with Trustees for Alaska. “The Fish and Wildlife Service has a legal obligation to do a thorough analysis of the potentially lethal effects of industry’s harassment of polar bears, and to consider ways to avoid and minimize that harm. The Biden administration ignored the law and its own science, and handled the process as if stamping an oil industry punch card.”

The regulation allows oil and gas companies to harass polar bears while carrying out broad and intensive industrial activities for five years, starting in 2021. Under the regulation, oil operators can harass bears in ways that compel the animals to delay or stop feeding, hunting, tending young, interacting with other bears, and generally focusing on survival. This harassment includes things like scaring bears off with noise, equipment and vehicles, and disrupting polar bear denning or eating sites.

For denning cubs, who are weak and need time in their dens with their mothers, this harassment can be fatal. Fish and Wildlife Service’s own science presented a 95 percent probability that the North Slope’s oil and gas activities will be lethal to polar bears over the regulation’s five-year period. The agency ignored this harm entirely; instead, it essentially issued the regulation as if the latest facts, science, and on-the-ground climate impacts do not exist.

Today’s lawsuit charges Fish and Wildlife Service with violating the National Environmental Policy Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and the Endangered Species Act.

The law firm Trustees for Alaska Trustees filed the lawsuit on behalf of seven groups and represents five clients in the case: the Alaska Wildlife Alliance, Alaska Wilderness League, Defenders of Wildlife, Environment America, and the Sierra Club, which also represents itself. Trustees is co-counseling with the Center for Biological Diversity, which represents itself and Friends of the Earth.

Group statements:

“The Southern Beaufort Sea polar bear population are the most imperiled polar bears on the planet, and we cannot allow oil and gas activities to threaten the future of a species already being pushed to the brink by our warming world,” said Kristen Miller, Alaska Wilderness League’s acting executive director. “This population has already declined by 50 percent during the last three decades — their survival is a bellwether for the future of a landscape and its people who are being ravaged by climate change. We must look to the Arctic for solutions to the climate crisis, not exacerbation.”

“Unchecked oil and gas development in Alaska’s Arctic impedes the survival of Southern Beaufort Sea polar bears, already one of the world’s most imperiled populations due to climate change and habitat loss,” said Nicole Whittington-Evans, director of Defenders of Wildlife’s Alaska Program. “Enough is enough. We can’t continue to send wildlife toward extinction in the name of fossil fuels, especially in a climate and biodiversity crisis.”

“Polar bears are already struggling to simply survive,” said Steve Blackledge, conservation program director for Environment America. “When oil drilling proposals threaten these majestic animals, it’s critical that we hold federal agencies accountable to the laws intended to ensure their survival. Extinction, after all, can’t be rectified.”

“Relying on bad math to gloss over the injury or death of newborn polar bear cubs for the sake of oil industry profit isn’t just morally wrong, it’s also unlawful,” said Sierra Club Arctic campaign representative Mike Scott. “We hope that the court will hold the Fish and Wildlife Service accountable to its mission and reject this harmful regulation.”

“The Biden administration flouted the law in allowing oil companies to continue their noisy, harmful onslaught on polar bears. We’re hopeful the court will overturn this dangerous rule that puts polar bears in the crosshairs,” said Kristen Monsell, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “President Biden promised bold action to address the climate crisis, yet his administration is allowing business-as-usual oil drilling in the Arctic.”

“Considering the Biden administration’s campaign promises to combat the climate crisis, gifting yet another Trump-era handout to Big Oil is extremely disappointing,” said Hallie Templeton, Legal Director for Friends of the Earth. “We will keep fighting and hope that the Court sees the clear violations of law in this most recent move.”

Communications contact: Brittany Miller, 202-222-0746, bmiller@foe.org

The post Lawsuit calls out Biden administration for allowing oil operators to harm Southern Beaufort Sea polar bears appeared first on Friends of the Earth.

Background:

The Arctic Refuge oil and gas program was created via the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which was passed in 2017 through the reconciliation process. Language contained in the tax bill directed the Interior Department to initiate an oil and gas development program and mandated two lease sales projected to yield $1.1 billion for the U.S. Treasury. That budget estimate has now been tested in the real world by a January 2021 lease sale, the results of which were an absolute failure. No major oil companies showed up to bid, only nine tracts were sold out of 22 offered, and the sale generated a mere $12 million — less than 1% of the revenue that was projected. Per-acre bid prices were projected in 2017 to be $2,250 — in reality, the average price per acre was just $27.67, literally pennies on the dollar.

Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is bad business, to the point where dozens of the world’s largest banks — including the six largest in the U.S. and five largest in Canada — have put policies in place against financing Arctic Refuge oil. The remote nature of the refuge, the global appetite to limit climate pollution, the negative impacts oil development would have on the region’s Indigenous communities and wildlife — combined, these make drilling on the coastal plain a dangerous and expensive risk that’s not worth taking. 

“On behalf of the Gwich’in Nation of Alaska and Canada, we thank the House Natural Resources Committee for listening to the voice of our people and starting down the road to restoring protections for Iizhik Gwats’an Goondaii Goodlit, the sacred place where life begins, our sacred lands in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge,” said Bernadette Demientieff, executive director of the Gwich’in Steering Committee. “For four years the Gwich’in people had our concerns ignored and rights trampled by an administration concerned only with bowing down to oil and gas interests, but we have trusted in the strength and knowledge of our ancestors and elders to overcome these adversities. Now we call on Congress to continue to push forward and finish the job of restoring protections to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge coastal plain.”

“When Congress opened the Arctic Refuge to oil and gas leasing in 2017, the American public was promised billions in federal revenue. Those projections were laughable then and those doubts were vindicated by a January lease sale that failed spectacularly,” said Kristen Miller, Alaska Wilderness League’s acting executive director. “It’s impossible today for anyone to credibly argue that Arctic Refuge oil is going to result in a jobs and revenue bonanza. Today’s markup advances bill language that imposes some much-needed fiscal common sense and long overdue action to reverse the fire sale of the crown jewel of our National Wildlife Refuge System.”

“Kudos to Congress for working to restore protections to the Arctic Refuge and its threatened wildlife,” said Kristen Monsell, a senior attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. “Polar bears desperately need a reprieve from the Trump administration’s death sentence. Alaska’s last wild places have to be put permanently off-limits to the rapacious oil industry or we’ll lock in climate chaos for generations to come.”

“We’re thrilled to see the budget effort to repeal the Arctic Refuge drilling program and buy-back existing leases move forward,” said Nicole Whittington-Evans, director of Defenders of Wildlife’s Alaska Program. “Developing this National Wildlife Refuge for oil and gas is simply bad business with unacceptably high costs to people, wildlife and the environment.” 

“We applaud Chairman Grijalva, Rep. Huffman, and the other leaders on the House Natural Resources Committee for taking this vital step to reverse a dangerous, risky and expensive provision gutting protections for the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge and allowing new oil drilling projects – which all major U.S. banks have since agreed not to finance,” said Earthjustice President Abbie Dillen. “The Trump-era plan is a waste of taxpayer funds and threatens the culture and food security of the Gwich’in Nation. Today’s repeal language would rightly remove it from our federal budget law.”

“Drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was never a good idea,” said Environment America Public Lands Director Ellen Montgomery. “With no major oil companies present at the initial lease sale and six of the largest U.S. banks announcing that they will not fund any new oil and gas development in the Arctic Refuge, the leasing program is a waste of taxpayer dollars that comes with catastrophic consequences for the caribou and polar bears that make the refuge their home. The House Natural Resource Committee’s actions toward reversing the program are a move in the right direction.”

“Oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was pushed through over the objections of impacted Alaska Native Communities and the general public under the false assumption that lease sales would generate over a billion dollars in profit. The first sale generated less than one percent of the projected revenue,” said Nicole Ghio, Senior Fossil Fuels Program Manager for Friends of the Earth. “Ending the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge oil and gas program and buying-back all existing leases is not only the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do.”

“Opening the Arctic Refuge to drilling is a bad deal for taxpayers, people, and the climate,” said League of Conservation Voters (LCV) Conservation Program Director Alex Taurel. “We stand in solidarity with the Gwich’in people in this fight against the wasteful and destructive oil and gas leasing program. It’s time for Congress to act to repeal the drilling provision in the 2017 Tax Act and today, the House Natural Resources Committee got us one step closer. We are thankful to Chair Grijalva and House Democrats for prioritizing this critical piece of legislation and look forward to working with them to ensure that this sacred landscape isn’t industrialized at bargain-basement prices.”

“Selling off the Arctic Refuge for drilling would trample Indigenous rights, destroy critical ecosystems, and exacerbate the climate crisis. It also makes no financial sense,” said Sierra Club Lands Protection Program Director Athan Manuel. “Buying back these leases and keeping drills out of this priceless wilderness is just plain common sense, and we applaud House Democrats for their leadership to stop this wasteful leasing program.” 

“This leasing program attempts to cater to fossil fuel interests by desecrating a wildlife refuge and lands important to Indigenous communities and ways of life, and held sacred by the Gwich’in Peoples of Alaska and Canada,” said Suzanne Bostrom, staff attorney with Trustees for Alaska. “Its implementation was illegal, disrespectful to human rights, oblivious to the climate crisis, and a fiscal policy disaster. Congress must repeal this unlawful, fiscally irresponsible leasing program now.”

“No amount of revenue could justify the destruction of lands that sustain the Indigenous Gwich’in and Iñupiat communities of the Arctic, but January’s lease sale proved beyond a doubt that the Arctic Refuge oil and gas leasing program was more than a violation of human rights—it was also a raw deal for taxpayers,” said Karlin Itchoak, Alaska state director for The Wilderness Society. “It is vital that Congress act to repeal the drilling provision in the 2017 Tax Act to ensure that the coastal plain isn’t plundered at bargain-basement prices, and we urge all House members to support this effort during the budgeting process.”

“Boosters of leasing in the Refuge promised taxpayers the moon, but the opening auction was a bust,” said Garett Rose, staff attorney at NRDC (the Natural Resources Defense Council).  “No major oil company showed up, and the sale raised a mere $12 million—a far cry from what polluters and their allies promised—and just one more reason industrializing this special place is a terrible idea. This is an opportunity for Congress to reverse that bad move.”

We are glad to see leaders in the House National Resources Committee have included repealing the Arctic Refuge oil and gas leasing program within the mark-up,” said Marshall Johnson, Interim Chief Conservation Officer at National Audubon Society. “The Arctic Refuge is a vibrant yet fragile ecosystem supporting millions of birds, including Tundra Swans and threatened Spectacled Eiders. Congress should protect it as part of our nation’s natural solutions infrastructure to mitigate global climate change instead of selling it off as part of a leasing program that is neither profitable nor responsible.”

“We applaud the House Natural Resources Committee for righting the wrong-headed decision to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas exploration, which threatened both the Gwich’in people and iconic wildlife such as polar bears, caribou, and musk oxen,” said Mary Greene, public lands attorney for the National Wildlife Federation. “There are simply no good reasons to destroy this crown jewel of wildlife refuges with reckless oil and gas development.”

“Allowing oil and gas leasing and development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was a mistake that needed to be corrected. We are encouraged that Congress is now taking bold action to rectify it,” said Alejandro Pérez, Senior Vice President, Policy and Government Affairs, World Wildlife Fund. “The lease sale held under this 2017 tax law generated less than 1 percent of the revenue projected, so we now have confirmation that this drilling program was not only environmentally irresponsible, but fiscally flawed as well.”

Communications contact: Brittany Miller, 202-222-0746, bmiller@foe.org

The post Indigenous and conservation groups support House reconciliation language that would repeal Arctic Refuge drilling program appeared first on Friends of the Earth.

“This project is in the important fall migration for Nuiqsut,” said Rosemary Ahtuangaruak, a Nuiqsut resident. “It should not happen. The village spoke in opposition and the greed for profit should not be allowed over our village.”

At an earlier phase of the case, the court found that plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the Bureau of Land Management failed to properly examine the significance of the greenhouse gas emissions caused by the project before approving it. A court-approved agreement now blocks work on the project until Dec. 1.

“It’s incredibly disappointing to see the Biden administration defending this environmentally disastrous project,” said Kristen Monsell, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “We hope it’s not the administration’s final word on Willow. President Biden promised climate action and our climate can’t afford more huge new oil-drilling projects. Conoco’s plan to refreeze melting permafrost in hopes of having a solid drilling surface highlights the ridiculousness of drilling in the Arctic. It’s one of many reasons why this project should never have been approved.”

“The Willow Project squeaked in at the end of Trump’s presidency. Why is the Justice Department giving it a lifeline?” said Hallie Templeton, deputy legal director at Friends of the Earth. “Biden’s administration has the power to reverse Trump-era Arctic drilling approvals and should begin that now rather than locking in a future for oil and gas development.”

Alaska has warmed more than twice as fast as the rest of the United States over the past 60 years, presenting many disruptions to Arctic ecosystems and exacerbating sea-level rise, sea-ice melt and permafrost thaw. ConocoPhillips’ plan involves using giant chillers to refreeze thawing permafrost to help ensure a solid drilling surface.

The Willow project also involves drilling up to 250 wells and building and operating a processing facility, hundreds of miles of ice roads, hundreds of miles of pipelines, an airstrip, and a gravel mine in the northeastern corner of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska.

Burning the estimated 590 million barrels of oil to be extracted during the life of the project would result in nearly 280 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions — the equivalent of nearly 65 coal plants operating for a year.

“Last week’s report from the International Energy Agency clearly showed that a path to a 1.5 degree world has no room for opening up new oil and gas fields for extraction,” said Matt Krogh, US oil & gas campaign director at Stand.earth. “It makes no sense to allow the extraction of 590 million barrels of oil from an undeveloped field. That undermines Biden’s climate commitments and rejects the analysis of the world’s leading energy modeling agency.”

Willow would permanently scar the largest undeveloped area in the United States, jeopardize the health and traditional practices of nearby Indigenous communities, and harm essential wildlife habitat for polar bears, migratory birds, caribou and other iconic species.

“Thirty years of climate pollution from this oil project will accelerate the global climate crisis and it is at odds with the Biden administration’s bold climate leadership,” said Eric Jorgensen, managing attorney for Earthjustice. “To stay on track with tackling this crisis in the short time we have, the Bureau of Land Management should revisit the Trump-era decision to green-light ConocoPhillips’ massive oil and gas development plan in the Western Arctic.”

Shortly after his inauguration, Biden issued Executive Orders 13990 and 14008, articulating climate and environmental policies that seek to facilitate an historic shift away from fossil fuels and toward a clean-energy future. He also flagged ConocoPhillips’ Willow project for review. Biden’s Interior Department has the authority to send ConocoPhillips’ Western Arctic project back to the drawing board.

Last week, the International Energy Agency released its annual report, providing a roadmap for the Global Energy Sector. In that report, the agency explicitly stated that to meet global energy demand while achieving net zero emissions by 2050, no new fossil fuel projects should be approved.

Background: About the Western Arctic Reserve
The Reserve is the largest tract of undisturbed public land in the United States, and its 23 million acres are recognized as a globally important ecological resource, home to bears, musk oxen, caribou and millions of migratory birds. The lakes and lagoons of the Reserve, including the Teshekpuk Lake Special Area, are one of the most productive wetland complexes in the world; a haven for up to 100,000 molting geese, more than half a million shorebirds, and high densities of loons and eiders; and, an important calving ground for the Teshekpuk Caribou herds. The Reserve provides calving, insect relief, and migration areas for three of the state’s caribou herds — the Western Arctic, Central Arctic and Teshekpuk Caribou herds — which provide vital subsistence resources for more than 40 communities in northern and western Alaska. The area also includes designated critical habitat for polar bears along the coastal areas of the Reserve and important habitat for other marine mammals, including Pacific walruses and ice seals. Congress recognized the extraordinary wildlife, wilderness, cultural, subsistence, recreational and historical values of the Reserve when it transferred the management of it from the U.S. Navy to BLM in 1976.

Expert contact: Hallie Templeton, (434) 326-4647, htempleton@foe.org
Rosemary Ahtuangaruak, (907) 367-3260, rahtuangaruak@gmail.com
Matt Krogh, (360)820-2938, mattkrogh@stand.earth
Kristen Monsell, (510) 844-7137, kmonsell@biologicaldiversity.org
Eric Jorgensen, (907) 500-7127, ericj@earthjustice.org

The post In Court, Justice Department Defends Trump’s Approval of Large Oil-Drilling Project in Western Arctic appeared first on Friends of the Earth.