|
Here are highlights of this month's climate litigation update. The full update is available here:
Supreme Court Invited Solicitor General to Present U.S. Views on Honolulu’s Climate Case Against Fossil Fuel Companies
The U.S. Supreme Court invited the Solicitor General to file a brief expressing the views of the United States on petitions for writ of certiorari seeking review of the Hawaii Supreme Court’s decision allowing Honolulu to proceed with its climate change lawsuit against fossil fuel companies. Justice Alito did not participate in the consideration of the petitions. The petitions present questions related to whether federal law preempts Honolulu’s state law claims. Sunoco LP v. City & County of Honolulu, No. 23-947 (U.S. June 10, 2024)
Mexico: Appellate Court Reverses Lower Court and Suspends Resolution that Considers Some Fossil Fuel Energy Clean
On July 2023, Greenpeace Mexico filed a lawsuit against the Energy Regulatory Commission (Comisión Reguladora de Energía or CRE), challenging the “Resolution No. A/018/2023 of the Energy Regulatory Commission, which updates the reference values of the methodologies for calculating the efficiency of electric energy cogeneration systems and the criteria for determining efficient cogeneration, as well as the efficiency criteria and calculation methodology for determining the percentage of fuel-free energy established in Resolutions RES/003/2011, RES/206/2014, RES/291/2012 and RES/1838/2016, respectively.”
Essentially, the challenged resolution allows a fraction of the electricity generated by fossil gas-fired combined cycle power plants to be considered as clean energy, “relaxing” the criteria for efficient cogeneration and the definition of fuel-free electricity generation. The organizations argue that this agreement violated the right to a healthy environment, because it promotes the use of fossil fuels to generate energy that can be classified as “clean.” The consequence of the agreement is that the percentage of clean energy generated in Mexico will falsely increase, but greenhouse gas emissions will not be reduced. In addition, it is argued that this measure is regressive, since it eliminates the incentive to promote the generation of renewable energy and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and the resolution will not allow Mexico to comply with its international climate change obligations.
On July 21, 2023, the Third District Court in Administrative Matters Specialized in Antitrust, Broadcasting and Telecommunications denied the requested injunction to suspend the effects of the contested resolution.
On August 18, 2023, Greenpeace appealed the Court’s decision to deny the injunction. On April 18, 2024, the Appellate Collegiate Court overturned the Court’s decision and granted the injunction relief. (Greenpeace v. Energy Regulatory Commission (CRE), Appellate Collegiate Court, Mexico)
|
