G2. Local Greens

On Thursday, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee is expected to hold a confirmation hearing for Doug Burgum, President-elect Trump’s pick to lead the Interior department. Interior oversees more than 500 million acres of American public land, including national parks, wildlife refuges, and multiple-use lands. Burgum, a former software executive and governor of North Dakota, is a multi-millionaire, but hardly the richest person in Trump’s orbit. Burgum, like Trump, is closely connected with people who are far richer than him — and he has a track record of going to great lengths to help his billionaire benefactor, Harold Hamm.

Unfortunately, senators may go into the hearing without the information they need to make an informed decision about Burgum’s nomination. Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, the chairman of the committee, scheduled Burgum’s hearing even though the committee hadn’t received Burgum’s paperwork as of Tuesday morning. Far from a formality, every nominee for a Senate-confirmed position undergoes an FBI background check, submits financial disclosure forms, and gets approval from government ethics officials.

In Burgum’s case, his financial and ethics situation should be of utmost concern to the Senate. Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, the top Democrat on the committee, is already calling foul over Burgum’s missing disclosures. Here’s why that’s so important.

Burgum and Hamm: Rich and richer

What we do know about Burgum so far raises major concerns about his ability to lead the Interior department in a way that does not result in Burgum further enriching himself — he’s worth at least $100 million today, according to Forbes.

When he was governor of North Dakota, Burgum disclosed that he has a land deal with Continental Resources, an oil and gas company founded by an even wealthier man, Harold Hamm. Hamm is several times richer than Burgum — an estimated $18.5 billion as of 2022, making him the 63rd wealthiest person in the world. This is a trend across the Trump administration — millionaires like Burgum doing work for billionaires rather than the American people and the public lands and resources that belong to all taxpayers.

(This is true all the way up to the White House, where President-elect Trump, who is only a billionaire on paper thanks to his meme stock, couldn’t post a bond large enough to appeal the $454 million fraud judgment against him. Thirty companies that underwrite appeal bonds didn’t think Trump’s assets could cover a verdict that large. In practice, Trump is a multi-millionaire at best. This helps to explain Trump’s willingness to do favors for actual billionaires like Elon Musk and Peter Thiel.)

Doug Burgum. Photo by Gage Skidmore, Wikimedia Commons.

Burgum’s staff refused to answer questions from CNBC about the governor’s deal with Continental Resources, which started in 2009. Continental’s oil wells on 200 acres of Burgum’s land started producing in 2011, with Burgum’s family getting 19 percent of the revenue from oil drilled on his land. In March 2024 alone, the wells produced over 5,000 barrels of oil and thousands of cubic feet of natural gas. Burgum has so far refused to reveal how much money Continental paid up front for the lease, or how much he’s made in royalties since the wells started producing.

We do know that in just one year from late 2022 into 2023, more than a decade into the deal, he made up to $50,000 in royalties — and oil wells are most productive early in their lifespan.

Burgum’s relationship with Hamm goes far beyond the land deal. After ending his own short-lived presidential campaign, Burgum partnered with Hamm to hold an oil-and-gas fundraiser for Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago. The Washington Post and New York Times reported that Trump asked the oil executives gathered by Burgum and Hamm to raise $1 billion for his campaign, and if they did, he would roll back environmental protections at the behest of the oil industry. Representatives from ExxonMobil and the American Petroleum Institute were reportedly in the room. The Post reported that Trump said giving him $1 billion would be a “deal,” because of the money the oil industry would save if he returned to the White House. The Guardian reported that the “deal” Trump offered would likely be worth $110 billion, mostly from tax loopholes that President Joe Biden pledged to close in his second term, and that Trump wants to keep.

Burgum admitted he was in the room at Mar-a-Lago, but denied that Trump offered a quid-pro-quo to the oil executives.

“What would be the No. 1 thing that President Trump could do on Day 1? It’s stop the hostile attack against all American energy, and I mean all,” Burgum told the executives, according to the Post. “Whether it’s baseload electricity, whether it’s oil, whether it’s gas, whether it’s ethanol, there is an attack on liquid fuels.”

Without a full look at Doug Burgum’s financial situation, it’s impossible to know how many ways Burgum could enrich himself, Hamm, or any of the oil and gas executives they invited to Mar-a-Lago last year. Without Burgum’s disclosures, it’s impossible to know whether he could enrich himself or his fellow housing developers by trying to sell off pristine national public land for development and trophy homes, which is a priority of Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Mike Lee.

A long-standing partnership

Hamm and Burgum were close even before the Mar-a-Lago dinner. In 2023, Burgum wrote a glowing review of Hamm’s memoir, praising his “ingenuity, determination, and pure grit,” adding that “Harold’s global impact has been immeasurable and is an inspiring story worthy of sharing.” That same year, during his state of the state address, Burgum compared Hamm to former President Teddy Roosevelt, saying that Hamm’s “hard work and determination has changed North Dakota and our nation.”

Harold Hamm speaks at the 2016 Republican National Convention. Video still via PBS Newshour.

Of course, Hamm’s relationship with Burgum isn’t only built on sycophantic flattery — it’s transactional. Hamm’s company is a major investor in a 2,000-mile pipeline project that would collect carbon dioxide emissions from ethanol plants across the Midwest and store them underground in North Dakota, and Burgum has supported the pipeline despite opposition from stakeholders in the state and across the Midwest.

The common thread in opposition to the project is the concern that developers could use eminent domain to force landowners to make way for the pipeline. While campaigning in Iowa, Burgum claimed that land owners could “just say no and they’ll move it to your neighbor and your neighbor can get the big check.” But a farmer in North Dakota blasted Burgum for not standing up for private property rights.

“It’s been very disheartening to see how our governor has not held true to what the promises were for the farming and ranching community,” Troy Coons told CNN in July.

Burgum’s administration backed a bill in 2019 that gave oil and gas companies the right to use “pore space” under the land to store CO2 and prevented land owners from demanding compensation for it. North Dakota’s Supreme Court later overturned the law.

Nara & Dvids Public Domain Archive

North Dakota’s public service commission ended up approving the pipeline permit in November, but didn’t resolve the question of eminent domain, which leaves land owners at risk of having to fight the Summit pipeline in court if the developers try to seize land using eminent domain. The state’s Industrial Commission, led by Burgum, voted unanimously in December to approve permits for Summit’s three proposed storage sites.

Hamm continues to return the favors to Burgum. Hamm donated $250,000 to Burgum’s “Best of America PAC” in 2023 and contributed to both of Burgum’s gubernatorial runs. Hamm even donated $50 million to Burgum’s pet project, a planned Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library in North Dakota.

What it means this week

As Interior secretary, and as the potential chairman of President-elect Trump’s amorphous National Energy Dominance Council, Burgum would have enormous sway over the future of Hamm’s Summit pipeline as well as any future pipelines that cross federal or Tribal land. He would oversee the agency that permits wind, solar, and geothermal energy on public land, even though Trump has already vowed that “no new windmills” will be built in America during his presidency. He would be in a position to encourage more exports of American methane overseas through liquefied natural gas terminals — a development that would inevitably raise home heating and electricity prices for Americans even as Trump has vowed to cut utility prices in half.

In December, Trump promised “fully expedited” permits and environmental reviews for any company willing to spend $1 billion or more on new projects. Burgum would be in a position to make good on that promise if he instructed civil servants in the Interior department to ignore environmental laws and issue those permits without proper reviews.

Whenever his financial paperwork arrives, senators will undoubtedly have a long list of questions about how or even if Doug Burgum could serve the country rather than his billionaire friends in the oil industry. Much like President Trump’s last Interior secretary, the “swamp creature” David Bernhardt, Burgum’s list of conflicts could end up so long he has to carry them with him at all times. The only way to find out is if senators insist that Burgum follow the highest ethical standards — even if that means he’s recused from so many decisions that there’s nothing for him to do as Interior secretary.

The post Trump’s interior nominee has an oil billionaire benefactor appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

January 14, 2025 – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Plan for Bear Ears National Monument Finalized in the Face of Threats to Public Lands in Utah  – 1.14.25

Contacts:
Judi Brawer, Wildlands Attorney, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA); (208) 871-0596 (judi@suwa.org)
Grant Stevens, Communications Director, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA); (319) 427-0260; grant@suwa.org

Salt Lake City, UT – Today, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) signed the Record of Decision for the final Resource Management Plan (RMP) for the restored Bear Ears National Monument. Below is a statement from SUWA Wildlands Attorney Judi Brawer and additional information. 

“The final plan takes important steps towards protecting Bears Ears’ unique natural and cultural landscape, while at the same time providing opportunities for respectful appreciation and enjoyment of this remarkable place. The plan is also the first of its kind, incorporating significant and meaningful input from Tribal Nations through the Bears Ears Commission,” said Judi Brawer, SUWA Wildlands Attorney. “Unfortunately, Utah Governor Spencer Cox and other anti-public land adversaries continue their attacks on Bears Ears, preferring extraction and destruction over management for the benefit of all Americans. SUWA remains deeply committed to continuing our work to protect and defend the Monument for current and future generations.”

 About the Monument

Bears Ears National Monument is a region of extraordinary natural diversity and cultural significance. On December 28, 2016, President Obama used his authority under the Antiquities Act to establish Bears Ears National Monument, granting a new layer of protection to some of the most spectacular places in southern Utah. Equally important, the proclamation elevated the voices of Tribal Nations that have ancestral ties to the region. Nearly 100,000 archaeological and cultural sites were covered by the proclamation, including House on Fire and Moon House.

The Bears Ears proposal was led by the five Tribal Nations that together comprise the “Bears Ears Commission:” the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, the Pueblo of Zuni, the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, and Ute Indian Tribe. As part of the collaborative planning process, the Bears Ears Commission developed A Collaborative Land Management Plan for the Bears Ears National Monument, which “synthesizes Tribal perspectives for the management of the Bears Ears living landscape.”

On December 4, 2017, President Trump ignored millions of public comments and in a brazenly illegal act repealed Bears Ears National Monument, replacing it with two much smaller, non-contiguous units totaling less than 230,000 acres (an 83% reduction). His unprecedented action left rare archaeological sites, unique flora and fauna, and stunning wildlands without protection from looting, uranium mining, oil and gas drilling, and off-road vehicle damage. Thankfully, on October 8, 2021, President Biden signed a proclamation restoring Bears Ears National Monument to its full, original boundaries—plus an additional 12,000 acres added to the Trump-era Indian Creek unit.

In 2023, BLM began the process of developing a management plan to govern the Bears Ears National Monument; this is a crucial opportunity to ensure that the monument is managed for its unique and extraordinary values. During both the scoping phase and after a draft plan was released, SUWA asked its members and supporters to submit comments to BLM, calling for a management plan worthy of this remarkable place.

In August 2023, a Federal District Court Judge in Utah dismissed lawsuits brought by the State of Utah, Blue Ribbon Coalition, and others challenging President Biden’s use of the Antiquities Act to restore the boundaries of Grand Staircase-Escalante and Bears Ears National Monuments. The state and other plaintiffs quickly appealed that decision to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, which held oral argument on September 26, 2024, and will issue a decision in the coming months. SUWA and nine other conservation organizations have intervened on behalf of the United States to defend President Biden’s restoration of the Monuments, as have four Tribal nations.

Background Information

• BLM E-planning page on the Bears Ears National Monument RMP
• SUWA Statement on Release of Draft Bears Ears National Monument Management Plan — March 8, 2024
• SUWA Statement on the Bears Ears National Monument Final Resource Management Plan (RMP) – 10.3.24
• SUWA Advocacy Actions – Scoping Phase (October 2022); Draft Plan (May 2024)
• SUWA webpage on Bears Ears National Monument 

###

The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) is a nonprofit organization with members and supporters from around the country dedicated to protecting America’s redrock wilderness. From offices in Moab, Salt Lake City, and Washington, DC, our team of professionals defends the redrock, organizes support for America’s Red Rock Wilderness Act, and stewards this world-renowned landscape. Learn more at www.suwa.org.

 

The post Plan for Bear Ears National Monument Finalized in the Face of Threats to Public Lands in Utah  – 1.14.25 appeared first on Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.

By Mike Goetz 

With the rising tide of inflation, increases in the cost of commodity goods, and energy infrastructure costs going up, the Northwest has an energy affordability challenge. With nearly 44% of U.S. households defined as low-income according to U.S. Department of Energy statistics in 2023, many customers are forced to make difficult decisions regarding whether they should use their limited income to buy groceries, necessary medication, or pay their utilities.  

The prices and terms of service of for-profit, investor-owned utilities are regulated by state utility commissions, who must balance the competing interests of the utility investor and customer when setting power and gas rates. Therefore, these state government agencies have considerable control over whether electricity and gas rates are affordable. 

Balancing reliability, affordability and climate goals is challenging but can be achieved simultaneously if utility commissions, utilities and other interested parties work together to advance creative solutions. To maintain affordability during a time of marked load growth and change in the utility sector, there are many tools that utility commissions can utilize. All utility customers deserve affordable rates and reliable services, and it is clear that the system demands and policy goals on utilities and regulators are driving unprecedented investments in infrastructure. In many ways, affordability is reliability, since utility disconnections resulting from a customer being unable to afford energy means that energy is not reliable to them. 

Utility rates are set by public utility commissions, who operate under a mandate to establish “just and reasonable” rates and to further the public interest. This term stems from a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case entitled Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas.  The “Hope test”, as it is called, requires that public utility commissions set utility rates that must be affordable to the customer, but must also provide utilities the opportunity to recover their operating costs and earn a reasonable rate of return. When public utility commissions establish just and reasonable rates, they must consider new costs on the utility’s system, as well as new revenues.  

To truly determine whether rates are affordable, utility commissions should consider the impact of rate increases on the most vulnerable customers on the utility’s system who are experiencing the highest levels of energy burden. 

The mandate to establish just and reasonable rates affords utility commissions extensive flexibility in the setting of rates, and these agencies enjoy tremendously broad authority to regulate utilities. NWEC urges these agencies to use their authority to ensure affordability and reliable service. 

Rates must consider costs and revenues and be set on a holistic basis 

Utility rates are principally set in general rate cases, where utility commissions set rates based on a holistic look at costs and revenues from across the utility’s operations.  This perspective enables regulators the ability to set rates at a just and reasonable level overall. 

However, in many states—such as Oregon and Washington—there are more and more “single-issue ratemaking mechanisms” that allow utilities to recover costs for individual costs outside of general rate cases. Sometimes these mechanisms contain what is called an “earnings test,” which will only allow recovery of the costs if the utility is not already earning its approved return on investments. However, many of these mechanisms do not. This can allow utilities to continue to add costs to rates without any consideration of whether their revenue is already adequate or if certain costs have decreased in another part of their system.  Without an earnings test, this approach can quickly lead to rates that are unaffordable. 

Fortunately, we can fix this. Utility commissions should strive to eliminate as many single-issue ratemaking mechanisms as possible, and place earnings tests on the appropriate remaining mechanisms. While some single-issue ratemaking mechanisms exist because they are authorized by statute or are the most efficient way to recover certain costs—such as those that fluctuate wildly or only exist for a short duration—many are not. For these mechanisms, utility commissions should require that their costs be recovered in a general rate case rather than through a separate mechanism. Consolidating proceedings also conserves the resources of utility commission staff and intervenors, provides greater insight into the overall setting of rates, and allows regulators greater control to ensure that rates are affordable and the public interest is being furthered. 

Empowering customers to participate in the ratemaking process 

 A general rate case functions as a trial-like proceeding compressed into an approximately nine-month timeline, and the documentation in the proceeding can be extensive.  

Most rate cases require legal representation, and they are expensive and time-consuming to engage in. This means that few parties have access to the resources to participate, even though representatives of certain communities may be the hardest hit by the rate increase. 

To increase participation by community and small customer interests in these processes, utility commissions should implement intervenor funding to allow parties to be reimbursed for the time they have spent in the case. This practice exists in both Oregon and Washington and has greatly expanded overall participation. 

Additional strategies the Commission can utilize under its existing authority 

To minimize the impact on customers, utility commissions can do several things when establishing just and reasonable rates: 

• Rates and utility profit levels can be set at the lower end of a reasonable range, while still providing the utility adequate cost recovery; 

• Delay or phase in rate increases to minimize the near-term impact; 

• Move rate increases outside of winter and summer periods when customers will be hit the hardest since their bills are higher;  

• Conduct analyses to determine whether rates are affordable by requiring a low-income needs assessment or energy burden analysis; 

• When the needs of low-income customers are seen, utility commissions can implement programs such as low-income bill discounts or a percentage of income payment plan. 

• Apply an earnings test or other customer protection tool to variable and power costs. These variable costs include costs to purchase electricity on the market.   Utilities forecast their anticipated variable costs for the following year, and that forecast eventually goes into customer rates. After the year is over, utilities compare their actual costs to the forecast. In most states in the West, utilities can pass that difference on to customers. This means that the utility faces little incentive to manage its generating resources as efficiently as possible and reduce the risk of needing to purchase electricity from the market to keep their costs down. However, some states, including Oregon, place an earnings test and other customer protection measures on the true-up between forecasted and actual costs. This provides an important incentive to the utility and can save customers millions of dollars annually. 

• Adopt progressive resource planning processes that potentially include a greater level of involvement in utility resource procurement decision-making. Investments  that provide the greatest benefit to the system over the long run should be prioritized. For example, by investing in smart programs like energy efficiency and demand response, we can shave the peak needs of our system and avoid building costly investments in new power plants. 

• Carefully examine cost causation in the assessment of significant new loads driven by data centers and large industrial loads. Managing cost increases due to new infrastructure and resource procurement to serve these large facilities will be important to protect residential customers. Commissions should assess the need for new policies to address the impact of these large loads.    

While this blog covers a high-level view of utility ratemaking and the means by which commissions and interested parties can help ensure rates are affordable, it is only the tip of the iceberg. NWEC and allies are working tirelessly across our region to advance creative solutions to ensure affordable, clean and equitable energy solutions for all. 

The post Regulatory tools to advance affordability in utility costs first appeared on NW Energy Coalition.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Utah’s land grab lawsuit, which sought control of 18.5 million acres of national public lands in the state. The high court’s decision strikes a major blow to Utah’s latest attempt to turn over the management of federal public lands.

In August, Governor Spencer Cox and then-Attorney General Sean Reyes filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court asking it to declare the management of millions of acres of federal land in Utah unconstitutional, a move that would have had serious ramifications for public lands across the country. The state has paid a law firm over $500,000 of taxpayer money to pursue the suit, and wasted millions more on a taxpayer-funded PR campaign to try to convince Utahns of their misguided effort.

“Even this staunchly conservative Supreme Court refused to take up Utah’s complaint, likely because it relies on a blatant misreading of the Constitution and would disrupt over a century of legal precedent and property law,” said Center for Western Priorities Executive Director Jennifer Rokala.

In December the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) sued the Utah governor and attorney general for bringing the case to the Supreme Court. Steve Bloch, SUWA’s legal director, said in a statement, “We’re grateful the Supreme Court swiftly rejected the State of Utah’s misguided land grab lawsuit. For more than 100 years, the Supreme Court has affirmed the power of the federal government to hold and manage public lands on behalf of all Americans.”

What Trump’s “energy dominance” agenda means for public lands

On the latest episode of The Landscape, Kate and Aaron are joined by Alan Zibel, a research director at Public Citizen who focuses on energy and environmental issues. He breaks down what Donald Trump and the incoming Congress’s so-called “energy dominance” agenda could mean for public lands—given that the U.S. is already the world’s top exporter of natural gas (otherwise known as methane).

Quick hits Supreme Court refuses to hear Utah’s latest public lands challenge

Salt Lake Tribune | Associated Press | Utah News Dispatch | Bloomberg Law | Fox 13 News | Axios | KUNC | KUER | National Parks Traveler | HuffPost | Reuters

Feds OK Wyoming idea to use old wind turbines to fill in coal mines

Cowboy State Daily | K2 Radio

Opinion: Haaland changed how America faces its history

Native News Online

How suburban sprawl and climate change are making wildfires more destructive

CBS News

Will Trump’s re-election mean déjà vu for Utah’s national monuments?

Salt Lake Tribune

Colorado prepares for second wave of reintroduced wolves

Colorado Sun

Outgoing BLM director Tracy Stone-Manning reflects on tenure

Grand Junction Daily Sentinel

Column: Taylor Sheridan’s “Landman” needs less fossil fuel propoganda

Los Angeles Times

Quote of the day

In Indian Country, we have a word for individuals like Deb Haaland: Warrior. And she has proven to be a fierce one.”

—Levi Rickert, Native News Online

Picture This

@usinterior

There are no roads or trails at the @usfws Pierce National Wildlife Refuge in Washington. Closed to the public, this refuge is literally for the birds.

A small refuge (329 acres) with big impacts on wildlife, Pierce supports one of the last remaining runs of chum salmon on the Columbia River and is also home to other state threatened and endangered species.

Photo taken from atop Beacon Rock by Brent Lawrence / USFWS

Featured image: Sign within the Cedar City Field Office area. Photo by Jeremy T. Dyer, BLM Utah.

The post Supreme Court refuses to hear Utah’s latest public lands challenge appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

Kate and Aaron are joined by Alan Zibel, a research director at Public Citizen who focuses on energy and environmental issues. He breaks down what Donald Trump and the incoming Congress’s so-called “energy dominance” agenda could mean for public lands—given that the U.S. is already the world’s top exporter of natural gas (otherwise known as methane). 

News

• House Republicans Pledge Drilling and Make It Easier to Shed Federal Land – New York Times
• Federal officials have finalized a ‘Western Solar Plan,’ but are changes coming under Trump? – Colorado Public Radio
• Kelly Parcel sale to Grand Teton National Park complete – Wyoming Public Radio
• Biden permanently bans offshore drilling in 625 million acres of ocean, making a Trump reversal difficult – CNN
• Biden to create two national monuments in California honoring tribes – Washington. Post
• U.S. Supreme Court refuses to hear Utah’s public lands challenge – Salt Lake Tribune

Resources

• Report: President Biden’s final year on public lands – Center for Western Priorities
• Episode transcript 

Credits

Hosts: Kate Groetzinger & Aaron Weiss 

Feedback: podcast@westernpriorities.org

Music: Purple Planet

Featured image: Oil and gas development on federal lease managed by BLM California; BLM California 

 

The post What Trump’s “energy dominance” agenda means for public lands appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

New year. New opportunities for solutions Joëlle Robinson Mon, 01/13/2025 - 9:55 am

A well pad explosion in Ohio has caused some local communities to worry about the safety of oil and gas. A bid to sell U.S. Steel to a Japanese company got shot down by President Biden. What does it mean for air quality in the region? States have begun rolling out new federally funded rebates to help households pay for energy efficiency upgrades and electric appliances. However, the programs are in limbo in Pennsylvania. Plus, Congress approved an extension of the Farm Bill in December but has yet to pass a new five-year version. 

We have news about a renowned Penn State geoscientist, Pennsylvania’s state amphibian and vultures.

The post Episode for January 10, 2025 appeared first on The Allegheny Front.

Federal funding is still pending as Biden’s term nears its end. The rebates can cover heat pumps, electric stoves and insulation.

The post New federal clean energy rebates are in limbo for residents of Pa. appeared first on The Allegheny Front.

January 13, 2025 – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

SCOTUS Denies Utah Land Grab Lawsuit – 1.13.25 One-line order rejects Utah’s long-shot bid

Contacts:
Steve Bloch, Legal Director, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA); (801) 859-1552 (steve@suwa.org)
Grant Stevens, Communications Director, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA); (319) 427-0260; grant@suwa.org

Salt Lake City, UT – Today, the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) rejected a lawsuit from the State of Utah which sought to order the federal government to begin selling off or otherwise “disposing” of more than 18.5 million acres of public lands in Utah. Below is a quote from SUWA Legal Director Steve Bloch and additional information. 

“We’re grateful the Supreme Court swiftly rejected the State of Utah’s misguided land grab lawsuit. For more than 100 years, the Supreme Court has affirmed the power of the federal government to hold and manage public lands on behalf of all Americans,” said Steve Bloch, Legal Director for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. “If successful, Utah’s lawsuit would result in the sale of millions of acres of public lands in redrock country to the highest bidder, an end to America’s system of federal public lands, and the dismantling of the American West as we know it. The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance will continue our unwavering efforts to ensure every attempted land grab by Utah politicians fails.”

Additional information:

In August 2024, the State filed an unprecedented lawsuit at the United States Supreme Court seeking an order requiring that the federal government begin selling off or otherwise “disposing” of more than 18.5 million acres of public lands in Utah. If successful, this effort would implicate more than 200 million acres of public lands across the West.

In December 2024, SUWA filed litigation (SUWA v. Cox) in Utah’s Third District Court (state court) alleging that Governor Cox and Attorney General Reyes violated the Utah Constitution’s provision that the “people inhabiting this State do affirm and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within [its] boundaries.” This language was a condition of statehood and is found in both Utah’s Constitution and the Utah Enabling Act, which led to Utah’s entry into the Union.

In support of its dangerous lawsuit and in an effort to confuse the public, the State is spending millions of dollars of taxpayer money on a propaganda campaign – dubbed “Let Utah Manage Utah Lands” – that fundamentally misstates both the facts and goals of its unprecedented lawsuit:

• As the State concedes in its legal filings, the public lands that are the target of its lawsuit were never owned by Utah. Instead, Native American Tribes have lived in what is present-day Utah from time immemorial and the federal government acquired all the lands comprising Utah from Mexico in 1848. The Ute Indian Tribe filed a brief with the US Supreme Court that urges the Court to dismiss Utah’s lawsuit, calls out Utah’s “vision of an America without public lands” and highlights the threat Utah’s filing poses to the Tribe’s Uncompahgre Reservation.
• As a condition of entry to the Union, in 1896 the citizens of Utah “forever disclaim[ed] all right and title” to the unappropriated public lands within its borders. The State’s lawsuit seeks to re-write the agreement that allowed it to become a part of the United States.
• If successful, the State’s lawsuit will not result in public lands automatically being given to Utah but instead would start a “disposal” process which could result in the sale of millions of acres of public lands to the highest bidder.
• A 2016 report by the Public Lands Subcommittee of the Conference of Western Attorneys General evaluated the same legal claims raised by Utah in its 2024 land grab filing and concluded that they are contrary to more than a hundred years of legal precedent. Hunters, anglers, and wildlife advocates have all singled out Utah’s lawsuit as a direct threat to the future of America’s public lands.

###

The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) is a nonprofit organization with members and supporters from around the country dedicated to protecting America’s redrock wilderness. From offices in Moab, Salt Lake City, and Washington, DC, our team of professionals defends the redrock, organizes support for America’s Red Rock Wilderness Act, and stewards this world-renowned landscape. Learn more at www.suwa.org.

 

The post SCOTUS Denies Utah Land Grab Lawsuit – 1.13.25 appeared first on Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.

Vultures have such bulletproof digestive systems they can even eat anthrax. But their powerful stomachs also serve an important environmental function.

The post The turkey vulture has a cast-iron stomach appeared first on The Allegheny Front.

On January 10 the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) released the Draft Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Operation of the Los Alamos National Laboratory (Draft LANL SWEIS). There is a 60-day review period for public comment and hearings will be held during the week of February 10th (see below for dates and times).  

If you go to any of the press releases from New Mexico’s well-known anti-nuke organizations, however, you’ll get the full story of this so-called study of the environmental impacts of continued pit production at LANL. The Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety (CCNS) website provides the background of how NNSA has failed to release previous SWEIS documents on a 10-year schedule starting in 1999, continuing to 2008, and then nothing in 2018. Now, in 2025, NNSA is proposing that this new SWEIS will cover 15 years of operations, during which time there has been no analysis for seven years, when dramatic changes have occurred. On the CCNS website: “LANL’s annual budget doubled to over five billion dollars” during those years.  “Seventy-nine percent of those taxpayer funds are for fabrication of plutonium pits, or triggers, for nuclear weapons.  As a result, there are unanalyzed impacts from that work.” Over 2,000 new employees have been hired, new buildings erected, and new support systems, all resulting in increased emissions, traffic, and impacts on surrounding communities, including Santa Fe.

What does the SWEIS propose in its three alternative actions? On the mailing list of the Los Alamos Study Group (LASG) are summaries of the actions:

The No-Action Alternative includes 87 new projects, totaling almost 1.5 million square feet, that would be implemented between 2024 and 2038. Also, under No-Action, NNSA would implement 11 projects involving facility upgrades, utilities, and infrastructure affecting about 216 acres of the LANL site. About 1.6 million square feet of excess or aging facilities would undergo DD&D under the No-Action Alternative. The No-Action Alternative also includes changes in operations, examples of which include increased plutonium pit production and the remediation of a chromium plume in Mortandad Canyon (which was the subject of a recent environmental assessment).

The Modernized Operations Alternative includes the scope of the No-Action Alternative plus additional modernization activities, including (1) construction of replacement facilities; (2) upgrades to existing facilities, utilities, and infrastructure; and (3) DD&D projects. Under the Modernized Operations Alternative, NNSA would replace facilities that are approaching their end of life, upgrade facilities to extend their lifetimes, and improve work environments to enable NNSA to meet operational requirements. The Modernized Operations Alternative also includes proposed projects to reduce greenhouse gases and other emissions. The Modernized Operations Alternative includes 139 new projects, totaling over 3.4 million square feet, that would be implemented between 2025 and 2038. Under Modernized Operations, NNSA would implement 27 projects involving facility upgrades, utilities, and infrastructure affecting about 925 acres of the LANL site. Of these 925 acres, up to 795 acres are proposed for installation of up to 159 megawatts of solar photovoltaic arrays across the site. An additional 1.2 million square feet of excess or aging facilities would undergo DD&D under the Modernized Operations Alternative.

The Expanded Operations Alternative includes the actions proposed under the Modernized Operations Alternative, plus actions that would expand operations and missions to respond to future national security challenges and meet increasing requirements. This alternative includes construction and operation of new facilities that would expand capabilities at LANL beyond those that currently exist. The Expanded Operations Alternative includes 18 additional new projects, totaling about 947,000 square feet, that would be implemented between 2025 and 2038. Under Expanded Operations, NNSA would implement 4 additional projects involving utilities and infrastructure affecting about 46 acres of the LANL site. Most of the utilities and infrastructure projects would be directly related to proposed projects under the Expanded Operations Alternative. The Expanded Operations Alternative also includes changes in operations, examples of which include revised wildland fire risk reduction treatments and management of feral cattle.

NNSA’s preferred “Expanded Operations Alternative,” incorporates all of the projects and programs of the previous two “alternatives” and adds even more. As Nuclear Watch New Mexico points out in its press release, “NNSA argues increased pit production at LANL is a “No Action Alternative” because it was self-approved in previous analyses under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). However, those analyses were done without public hearings in lesser “Supplement Analyses” to an outdated 2008 nation-wide programmatic environmental impact statement and the 2008 LANL site-wide EIS.”

Greg Mello, of Los Alamos Study Group, also points out: “If NNSA were actually following NEPA, LANL’s huge pit production efforts would be paused pending environmental analysis. There has never been an environmental analysis of alternatives to LANL’s pit production mission. For that matter there has also never been even a business-case analysis supporting LANL’s pit mission —although there has been one which doesn’t support it!” 

Jay Coghlan, Director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, summarized the dangerous fallout of this preferred action: “The United States already has a reliable, extensively tested nuclear weapons stockpile that can end human civilization many times over. These exorbitant sums for the production of new-design nuclear weapons will just push us deeper into the new, increasingly dangerous nuclear arms race. This robs taxpayers’ money from addressing today’s acute threats, such as catastrophic wildfires and potential global pandemics.” 

DOE and NNSA will hold public hearings on their draft SWEIS.  The first hearing will be in-person and virtual on Tuesday, February 11th at the Santa Fe Community Convention Center from 1 to 4 pm and 5 to 9 pm.  The second hearing will be in person only on Wednesday, February 12th from 5 to 8 pm in Española at the Mision y Convento.  The third hearing will be in person only on Thursday, February 13th in Los Alamos at Fuller Lodge from 5 to 8 pm.  

Rep. John Garamendi, Richmond Mayor Eduardo Martinez, and City Manager Shasa Curl Announce over $9 Million Federal Grant for Safer Streets 

Representative John Garamendi, Richmond Mayor Eduardo Martinez, and City Manager Shasa Curl announced that the U.S. Department of Transportation awarded a $9,559,482 grant through the Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program to implement complete streets improvements that mitigate barriers to mobility and connectivity, making our community safer and better connected.

A Year of Wins (Big and Small!) at the SF Bay Chapter sf-liana Fri, 2025-01-10 16:48

Sierra Club San Francisco Bay Chapter accomplished a lot of work in 2024. Our staff-led campaigns produced webinars and events, attended public hearings, and ran actions reaching thousands of members and supporters to educate them and galvanize them to action. All of this work happened even as our leaders and volunteers led additional campaigns, guided endorsements, directed positions, and engaged decision-makers in support of the environment and environmental justice. Along with this on-the-ground work, we also hired a new Chapter Director and two new Chapter Organizers to spearhead our campaign work, build relationships with our partners, and support our volunteers.

SF Warehouse Ordinance 

In the beginning of 2024, the Chapter helped to pass an ordinance in San Francisco requiring conditional use authorization permitting for new warehouse development. Warehouses serving e-commerce needs act as magnets for sources of emissions like trucks and cargo equipment. In San Francisco as of 2022, 100% percent of the warehouses (within a .2 mile radius) are in areas where diesel particulate matter 2.5 pollution is in the 90th percentile. This is largely clustered in the southeastern part of the city where communities are dealing with the history of and ongoing harms of environmental injustice.

The CUA ordinance requires additional review and oversight for any new warehouse development above a certain size. This gives communities greater awareness of the projects proposed for their communities and greater opportunity for interventions to reduce the harmful emissions that warehouses bring in. The Chapter was proud to work with a coalition to get this ordinance passed before the warehouse moratorium expired, a coalition that included community partners, the SF Building Trades, the SF Labor Council, and the Teamsters.

Sea Level Rise Education–”Heron and the Green Crayon”

As part of our efforts to increase awareness of the benefits of natural and nature-based solutions to sea level rise, we published a comic in March 2024 that illustrates the Sierra Club’s approach to adaptation and resilience. “Heron and the Green Crayon” follows a black-crowned night heron, the iconic local bird named Oakland’s official bird in 2019, as it describes green infrastructure possibilities in the Bay Area region. With rising tides imminent, appropriate planning is necessary. “Gray” infrastructure can have unintended, negative consequences, so “greening the gray” is always a better option as it supports natural resiliency and can be more cost-effective in the long-term.

Nutrient Pollution Permits Strengthened

Following up on work in 2023 calling on the Regional Water Quality Control Board to implement stricter nutrient permits from wastewater dischargers after two harmful algae blooms (HABs) that led to fish kills in the Bay Area, the San Francisco Bay Chapter continued to work to pressure the Water Board to strengthen the permit guidelines. Over the summer of 2024, the Water Board held a hearing on the new permits that required a stricter standard on nitrogen levels allowed to be discharged, a key nutrient for HABs. The Chapter recruited more than 90 people to give public comment, calling on the Water Board to maintain the standards in the face of pressure from dischargers to weaken them. Ultimately, the permitting passed as we called for. Along with this mobilization, we also conducted educational tours of various local wastewater facilities for our volunteers to learn more about the processes that are critical to protecting our local waters from pollution.

Fighting the Dangerous Oakland Airport Expansion

In 2024, the campaign to stop Oakland Airport’s dangerous and unnecessary expansion came to a head with the release of the Final Environmental Impact Report and subsequent Port of Oakland Commission vote on whether to certify. The Chapter had been opposing the expansion since 2022 since it would double passenger flights and increase cargo flights, leading to a heavy increase of emissions that would harm East Oakland, an environmental justice community, and the climate. We had an ongoing action that garnered 1200 signatures along with sending and signing on to several letters and showing up to hearings.

After signing onto comments outlining the deficiencies in the Draft Environmental Impact Report, we waited for an updated FEIR only to realize that it remained inadequate. The FEIR did not appropriately account for all the emissions and impacts that the airport expansion would cause and subsequently did not develop appropriate mitigation measures in order to ensure that communities and the environment would not be damaged by the “significant and unavoidable impacts.” We launched a new action that earned X actions in the one week it was live and attended the Commission hearing as part of a 60+ person mobilization, all opposed to the certification of the FEIR and the airport expansion. Despite groundswell community opposition, a faulty FEIR and misrepresentations of the expansion’s impacts, the Port of Oakland Commission voted to certify the expansion, essentially greenlighting the project. However, the campaign isn’t over! We’re exploring all legal options to protect our communities and the environment. 

Calling on Community Choice Aggregates to Reject Dangerous Nuclear Allotments

Sierra Club has been a longtime proponent of Community Choice Aggregates and their work to procure renewable energy as an alternative to fossil fuel based energy from standard utilities like PG&E. We’ve long supported and watchdogged CCAs like MCE and Ava Community Energy. Unfortunately, this year MCE and Ava were offered energy allotments from PG&E powered by nuclear energy. Sierra Club has had a blanket anti-nuclear policy for decades, and as such the Chapter opposed both CCAs accepting the nuclear allotments. MCE, California’s first CCA, has a founding principle to not procure nuclear energy. Nuclear energy can be highly volatile, as seen in cases like Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima, and produces harmful radioactive waste that is often disposed of near marginalized communities. 

For these reasons, Sierra Club opposed MCE and Ava accepting the nuclear allotments as we believe it violates the CCA commitment to renewable energy and goes against Sierra Club’s vision of a truly renewable energy future that supports all communities. We ran petitions for both CCAs, garnering 124 actions taken, and turned out to both public hearings to let our position be known. Unfortunately, both CCAs voted to accept nuclear allotments while still claiming to oppose nuclear energy future, particularly Diablo Canyon Power Plant. We’re working to ensure their remain true to their commitment and do their part in making sure Diablo Canyon shuts down and decommissions in 2030 as planned. 

Protecting the Clean Water Act from San Francisco’s Lawsuit Against the EPA

In late August, Chapter staff and volunteers launched a campaign to stop the lawsuit San Francisco filed against the EPA for dumping untreated sewage into the ocean from going to the conservative-majority Supreme Court which would likely use it as an opportunity to deregulate the EPA and undermine the Clean Water Act. We built a coalition of dozens of organizations, getting 70 community-based, environmental, environmental justice, water, and water justice organizations to sign on to a letter to the Supervisors, Mayor, City Attorney, and SFPUC General Manager. Between three actions, we garnered over 3000 letters sent and calls made. We held a press conference and rally in front of San Francisco City Hall. We mobilized more than 100 people to two Board of Supervisors meetings. And we raised the specter of this issue, earning more than 40 media spots locally and nationally.

Our work culminated in the passage of a resolution calling on the Mayor, City Attorney, and SFPUC General Manager to drop the lawsuit–a bold, strong statement from the Board of Supervisors. Nonetheless, Breed, Chiu, and Herrera kept the lawsuit which was heard by the Supreme Court on October 16th. We’re awaiting a decision between January and June. In the meantime, we’re going to keep the momentum going and continue to build a powerful movement calling for accountability from San Francisco decision-makers–and hold the opaque and intractable SFPUC to task for their out-of-touch policy decisions. 

Ensuring Timely and Equitable Implementation of Zero-NOx Appliance Rules

After passing first-in-the-nation rules at the Bay Area Air Quality Management District requiring the selling of appliances that don’t produce nitrous oxide, an emission harmful to human health, the SF Bay Chapter continued to ensure that the rules remain on the same timeline so that the health benefits will be achieved quicker AND that the rollout of the rule does not cause undue burden to disadvantaged communities. 

The Sierra Club remained engaged with the BAAQMD Board and Staff throughout 2024, and worked with the Equitable Implementation Working Group to ensure that the rules would have the greatest impact with the least burden to the greatest number of people possible. In the latter half of 2024, we also worked to ensure that BAAQMD maintained the established timeline for heat pump water heaters of 2027 being the date when zero-NOx appliances would be the only available option for purchase. We educated and mobilized our base and collaborated with partners in order to ensure the Board maintained the 2027 date. Our petition garnered over 500 actions and we mobilized more than 70 speakers to the early December hearing. We will continue to work to ensure that the rules remain in effect and are executed to the greatest benefit possible to local community health and the environment. 

Planning for Regional Sea Level Rise Adaptation and Resilience

The SF Bay Chapter has been deeply engaged for several years in regional adaptation for anticipated sea level rise. With rising tides will come impacts against ecosystems and communities. The Bay Area is unusual in the level of disadvantaged communities near shorelines, highlighting the need for appropriate planning. However, not all sea level rise adaptations are created equal, with “gray” or hard infrastructure having potential negative consequences, including downstream impacts. Sierra Club has adopted the position of prioritizing natural and nature-based solutions, including wetlands and marshlands restoration, living levees, and more.

In 2024, the Bay Conservation and Development Commission needed to draft and adopt a Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan that would outline the guidelines for Bay-facing municipalities to develop sea level rise adaptation plans. The Chapter worked to ensure the RSAP put nature and communities first. To accomplish this, we needed to educate and mobilize our base so we put on 6 events to teach our supporters about the issue and train them on how to take action. Trainings ranged from LTE writing to giving public comment. We recruited over 300 people to these workshops, and concurrently ran actions and turned people out to hearings. Our actions garnered over 1000 actions taken and we had a total of 20 speakers on the day of the final vote.

Ultimately, the BCDC Commission adopted a version of the RSAP in early December that included most of our requests. While we had previously not been optimistic, thanks to thoughtful review and powerful organizing, we were able to achieve a sea level rise plan that will help our communities and ecosystems adapt and build resilience. 

Empowering the next generation of leaders through policy and advocacy education

For a second year, the SF Bay Chapter co-sponsored and co-led the California Youth Climate Policy program (CYCP), taking more than 50 students through a six-month program that covers how to evaluate and create policy, how to build a coalition, and how to work with their school board to get an environmental or climate policy passed.

The program is an off-shoot of the SF Bay Chapter’s Climate Literacy Committee, designed in partnership with environmental educator non-profits Ten Strands and Undaunted K-12. A key element of the program’s success are the adult mentors who are paired with each student and support them on their policy journey. Mentors reported feeling deep purpose in their work, learning about policy and advocacy alongside their students. The students’ outcomes were striking: 100% agreed or strongly agreed that CYCP built their leadership skills; 100% felt they were capable of influencing sustainable change within their district, and 100% agreed or strongly agreed that the program furthered their understanding of civics and democracy. Plans are in progress for a 3rd year of CYCP to start summer 2025.
 

Chapter News Clean Energy Dirty Energy Environmental Justice Shorelines & The Bay

Climate Solutions' 2025 Oregon Legislative Agenda Climate Solutions Fri, 01/10/2025 - 4:06 pm

I am writing with the important update that I will be stepping away from my role as Executive Director of MEIC after the first week of February. First and foremost– thank you. Serving as Executive Director has been one of the greatest honors of my professional life. Over the past six years at MEIC, I …

The post Farewell, and thanks for everything from MEIC’s Executive Director Cari Kimball appeared first on Montana Environmental Information Center - MEIC.

It’s the kick-off to Legislative Update Season! In this video, we review how a bill moves through the Legislature and when you can comment on it, the Legislature’s new tools and how to navigate them, how to best contact legislators, how to use MEIC’s Bill Tracker, and what we see on the horizon. Links and …

The post Webinar Recording: MEIC Weekly Legislative Update, Jan. 9, 2025 appeared first on Montana Environmental Information Center - MEIC.

Latest News From Richmond City Hall

Catch up on hot items from the last Richmond City Council meeting below. If you're interested in making public comments as a member of RPA or getting involved, contact us. Meetings are primarily held on the first, third, and fourth Tuesday of each month at 440 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804.

By Ren Wadsworth, NonStop Local Anne Hedges, Executive Director of the Montana Environmental Information Center, explained, “ultimately our read of the case is it is an absolute victory for the people of the state to know that the state is going to have to consider climate change when it permits operations.” Read the full story.

The post Environmental impacts of Yellowstone Generating Station under review appeared first on Montana Environmental Information Center - MEIC.

Position Summary: The Montana Environmental Information Center (MEIC) is a non-partisan, non-profit environmental advocate dedicated to ensuring clean air, clean water and a healthy climate for Montana’s present and future generations. The Development Officer is responsible for the organization’s fundraising activities and developing and implementing the adopted long-term vision and annual fundraising plans to fund …

The post Now hiring: MEIC Development Officer appeared first on Montana Environmental Information Center - MEIC.

“You’ll never believe what we just found!” That brief and excited message came from my good friend Steve McKenzie, who lives in Sechelt, on British Columbia’s Sunshine Coast. Pictures soon followed. “It’s got to be one of the biggest ones in the province!”

Gauging his level of enthusiasm, I was not surprised that it was a Pacific yew he was talking about. Steve’s particular passion for Taxus brevifolia knows no bounds, and no visit is complete until he obtains a signature photo of himself joyously embracing the tree!

Steve and yews, this is pretty much all you need to know!

But first, the back story! Steve’s wife Tess had been out walking some local trails in the Sechelt Community Forest with family dog Delores , an energetic husky who also happens to be one of my favourite canine companions. She (Tess, not so much Delores) had stumbled upon a fairly large Pacific dogwood , in bloom no less, and was hoping to show the tree to Steve.

Delores the Adventure Dog. Be sure to follow her on Instagram!

They soon revisited the forest, in pursuit of the dogwood, but along the way, Steve’s wandering eyes were drawn to a massive moss laden tree on the banks of a small creek. “Could that be….? Yes, yes it is!!!” The striking Pacific yew turned out to be the biggest specimen either of them had ever seen! The tree now carries the name “Yewlanda,” and last time I checked, Steve still had not seen that dogwood tree!

First picture of the tree, taken by Tess McKenzie, an excellent photographer. This is still my favourite image of Yewlanda!

When talk turns to big trees here in the Pacific Northwest, the Pacific yew generally goes unmentioned. After all, it certainly doesn’t rival species like Douglas fir, western red cedar, or Sitka spruce when it comes to size. Yews thrive beneath the canopy of those taller trees, and benefit from the shade and shelter they provide. They are almost always covered in an array of epiphytic plants. A wide variety of mosses, ferns and the young seedlings of larger trees often germinate in these thriving plant communities, which also serve to trap sediments and moisture, which helps cool the tree.

My first look at the tree from the nearby trail. Early sunlight actually made photography somewhat more difficult.

Last summer I journeyed to the Sunshine Coast to visit Steve with Doug Pope, another close friend of ours. We were eager to explore the forests of the region, and to finally see the legendary yew we had heard so much about. Yewlanda, as it happens, is practically in Steve’s backyard, a mere five minute drive, followed by a fifteen minute hike, from his front door! We wanted to verify its measurements, as we planned to eventually nominate it to the BC Big Tree Registry. Considering its exceptional size, the tree will also qualify for protection under British Columbia’s Special Tree Protection Regulation.

That signature moment that Doug and I were waiting for! Never fails to make me smile The crown spread of this Pacific yew is spectacular, and the tree is very healthy

The diameter is 0.82 metres (2.69 feet) and the remarkable crown spread is about 16 metres (52.5 feet), when averaged. Due to a particularly dense forest canopy, I was only able to verify the height at 24 metres (78.7 feet). The trunk actually rises several metres higher, but onsite conditions prevented a more accurate measurement. Yewlanda is certainly one of the most unique trees I have have chanced to meet, and has me daydreaming of other hidden gems on the Sunshine Coast. As much as we travel far and wide searching for big trees, it’s still a good idea to be vigilant when close to home. Sometimes the grandest discoveries are a lot closer than you think!

Steve and Doug measuring Yewlanda A truly remarkable specimen! This image shows you that it isn’t easy to see the top, and from where you can, it’s hard to get a clear sight line on the base to triangulate the height The upper reaches!

*******AUTHOR’S NOTE*******

Many thanks to Steve and Tess McKenzie, who have always welcomed me on my visits to the Sunshine Coast, leaving me with so many happy memories. Also, before I forget, a shout out to my friend Bosco the Cat. Good times!