|
|
|
|
|
The Sabin Center for Climate Change Law hosted and participated in a number of Climate Week NYC 2024 events on wide-ranging topics, including renewable energy impacts, marine carbon dioxide removal, international and U.S. climate litigation, and much more.
Read the summary of our highlighted events below:
|
|
|
|
We and Foley Hoag LLP co-hosted a panel discussion on Combating Myths and Misinformation about Renewable Energy Impacts. The panel featured a lively discussion and insights from Jael Holzman (Heatmap News), Peggy Shepard (WE ACT for Environmental Justice), Timmons Roberts (Brown University), and Peter Lehner (Earthjustice). Panel was moderated by our Senior Fellow, Matthew Eisenson.
|
|
|
At a Climate Week event titled Accelerating RD&D for Responsible Marine Carbon Dioxide Removal and held at the New York City Bar Association, we brought together over 200 participants to reflect upon our progress in advancing marine CDR research and testing over the past year and to steer the course ahead.
|
|
The Columbia Climate School held its first-ever Climate Week NYC Showcase to highlight its mission of partnership and collaboration on climate solutions that make a real change in the world. Michael Burger spoke to one of the five Action Collaboratives -- energy.
|
|
|
Title: Climate Litigation and Future Generations
Date and time: Tuesday, October 15, 2024, from 9:30 AM to 12 PM
Description: As the climate crisis intensifies, the legal fight for the rights of future generations is gaining momentum. This event will bring together leading voices in international law and climate change to discuss how landmark cases are shaping the global response to environmental degradation. We'll explore how courts and human rights institutions are redefining state responsibilities, holding governments and corporations accountable, and pushing for legal solutions that protect both present and future generations. Don’t miss this dynamic discussion on the evolving role of climate litigation in creating a sustainable future.
Register here.
|
|
New on the Climate Law Blog
|
|
More blog posts are available here.
|
|
Highlighted Resource: Climate Litigation Database New Category
|
|
|
The Sabin Center expanded the U.S. Climate Litigation Database with a new Carbon Offsets case category. Read our blog post by Keir F Adamson explaining the methodology here.
We hope the new category will provide a resource to attorneys working on matters related to carbon offsets, as well as to others interested in how litigants and courts are addressing issues raised by the voluntary and mandatory use of offsets and credits. (The Global Climate Litigation Database will be updated with a new case category in the near future.)
|
|
Updates to the Climate Case Charts
|
|
Here are highlights of this month's climate litigation update. The full update is available here:
North Dakota Federal Court Enjoined Enforcement of BLM Waste Prevention Rule for Oil and Gas Production on Federal and Tribal Lands
The federal district court for the District of North Dakota enjoined enforcement of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) rule on “Waste Prevention, Production Subject to Royalties, and Resource Conservation” rule (Waste Prevention Rule) against North Dakota, Montana, Texas, Wyoming. The court first denied the federal defendants’ motion to transfer to the District of Wyoming, which had reviewed and vacated the 2016 version of the Waste Prevention Rule. The North Dakota court found that venue was proper in the District of North Dakota and that the defendants did not meet their burden to show that transfer was warranted for judicial economy or other reasons. Regarding the plaintiff states’ motion for a preliminary injunction, the court found that the states were likely to succeed on the claim that the 2024 Waste Prevention Rule was arbitrary and capricious. The court stated that the case was “an example of where the left hand of the government does not know what the right hand of the government is doing,” citing the existing Clean Air Act framework for regulating air emissions based on state-federal cooperation. The court found the BLM rule was not “reasonably explained,” including because it did not explain why requiring flaring gas rather than venting was more economically productive, did not explain exemptions to the rule’s flaring requirement, and did not support statements that production and exploration were major sources of wasted gas. Given that it found the rule to be arbitrary and capricious, the court declined to consider the plaintiff states’ argument that rule’s stated purpose was “simply a pretext for BLM’s desire to mandate flaring over venting for climate change purposes.” The court further found that the states demonstrated they would suffer irreparable harm to their sovereign authority and also found that the balance of harms and public interest favored the states. North Dakota v. U.S. Department of Interior, No. 1:24-cv-00066 (D.N.D. Sept. 12, 2024)
In a related case, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a petition for rehearing of its order vacating the District of Wyoming’s 2020 decision that held that the 2016 Waste Prevention Rule exceeded the agency’s authority. The Tenth Circuit concluded that vacating the 2020 decision was appropriate since BLM’s repeal of the 2016 rule and promulgation of the 2024 Waste Prevention Rule rendered the appeal of the 2020 decision moot. Wyoming v. U.S. Department of the Interior, No. 20-8072 (10th Cir. Sept. 16, 2024)
Ireland: Challenge on Legality of Ireland’s Climate Action Plan 2024
Community Law and Mediation Centre (CLM), a public interest NGO based in Ireland, and three other plaintiffs (a grandfather, a toddler, and a youth climate activist) are seeking a declaration from the High Court of Ireland that the Government's Climate Action Plan 2024 (CAP24), the instrument by which the government sets out the roadmap for meeting Ireland’s legally binding carbon budget, fails to meet the legal standards set by the Climate and Low Carbon Development Act 2015. They argue that the CAP24, as adopted, undermines the State’s efforts at effective climate action in line with Ireland’s legal obligations; and is not in compliance with the first carbon budget or the carbon budget programme and was prepared, submitted and approved in breach of the 2015 Act. In addition, they argue that CAP24 violates the fundamental rights of the three individual applicants, marginalized groups that CLM works with, and future generations, as protected by the Constitution of Ireland 1937, the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights. The case aims to build off the recent European Court of Human Rights Klimaseniorinnen case to determine whether Ireland’s allegedly insufficient action constitutes a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. Specifically, the petition asks whether CAP24 is argued to be legally insufficient and non-compliant with Ireland’s carbon budget and climate obligations, and:
(a) Fails to meet legal standards set by the Oireachtas.
(b) Undermines effective climate action in line with Ireland’s legal obligations.
(c) Does not comply with the first carbon budget or the carbon budget programme.
(d) Was prepared, submitted, and approved in breach of the 2015 Act.
(e) Violates fundamental rights of individuals, marginalized groups, and future generations as protected by various legal frameworks.
The case is pending and will next be heard in October 2024. Community Law and Mediation Centre and Others v. Ireland (Ireland, High Court of Ireland)
|
|
Please send additional material for inclusion in the climate case charts to
manager@climatecasechart.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
