Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

White River, near the location of the proposed rights-of-way

White River, near the location of the proposed rights-of-way. (Photo: Ray Bloxham, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance)

New Lawsuit Challenges Energy-Intensive 'Disaster for Climate, Wildlife, and Colorado River Basin'

The proposed massive oil shale project would drain more than 3 billion gallons of water per year from the Green River

Andrea Germanos

A coalition of conservation groups filed a legal challenge this week to the Trump administration's approval of what would be the nation's first commercial-scale oil shale mine and processing facility—a fossil fuel project the groups say would run roughshod over the environment.

At issue is Estonia-based Enefit American Oil's strip-mining South Project for eastern Utah's Uinta Basin.

In their lawsuit (pdf) filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Utah, the organizations say that the administration violated the law in approving several rights of way for utilities across public lands to enable the company to construct and operate its proposed 50,000-barrel-per-day project.

The lawsuit states:

BLM and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (Service) failed to adequately analyze the significant adverse environmental impacts of Enefit's oil shale development. Instead, BLM and the Service only focused on the relatively minimal impacts caused by constructing and maintaining the pipelines, transmission lines, and access road. This impermissibly narrow review violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA), undermined informed decision making and public participation, and failed to prevent harm to imperiled fish and plant species.

"The responsible federal agencies have worn blinders in approving this project, leaving themselves and the public in the dark about the immense ecological harm it would cause," said Alex Hardee, an associate attorney at Earthjustice.

Michael Toll, a staff attorney at Grand Canyon Trust, laid out what the project would entail:

Enefit's South Project would dig up more than 28 million tons of oil shale per year, generating hundreds of millions of tons of waste rock and "overburden"—the industry term for the soils, plants, and layers of rock that lie in the way.

It would also drain more than 3 billion gallons of water per year from the Green River in a region that averages fewer than 10 inches of precipitation annually. The total carbon dioxide emissions of the over 547 million barrels of oil produced over three decades—if you follow the lifecycle of the oil shale from mine to wheel—would be up to 75 percent higher than those of conventional fuels.

The water diversion, the suit adds, "would potentially jeopardize the continued existence of the four fish species and adversely modify their habitat." On top of that threat, "the rights-of-way and Enefit's oil shale operations would destroy a significant portion of the remaining critical habitat for two plant species proposed for listing under the ESA, the Graham's penstemon and White River penstemon."

Despite such threats, the administration greenlighted the rights-of-way—which the groups say are what makes the project feasible—in September. 

"We are proud to do our part to move this important energy project forward," BLM deputy director Brian Steed said (pdf) at the time.

Given the project's broad impacts, Ted Zukoski, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, called it "a prescription for disaster for our climate, wildlife, and the Colorado River Basin."

Given the climate crisis, said Dan Mayhew, conservation chair of the Utah Chapter of the Sierra Club, it's time to be stepping away from harmful fossil fuel projects.

"We should be accelerating the transition to clean energy," said Mayhew, "not sacrificing our water, air quality, and climate for an investment in one of the dirtiest fossil fuels in the world."

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

This is the world we live in. This is the world we cover.

Because of people like you, another world is possible. There are many battles to be won, but we will battle them together—all of us. Common Dreams is not your normal news site. We don't survive on clicks. We don't want advertising dollars. We want the world to be a better place. But we can't do it alone. It doesn't work that way. We need you. If you can help today—because every gift of every size matters—please do. Without Your Support We Simply Don't Exist.

'A Deal's a Deal': Progressive Leader Holds Strong on $3.5 Trillion Social Investment Plan

Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal says around 60 Democrats are willing to vote down a weaker bipartisan bill if the more sweeping reconciliation bill does not come first.

Jon Queally ·

Critics Fume as ICC Excludes US From Probe Into Afghan War Crimes

"Allowing powerful states to get away with multi-year, multi-continent torture against so many feeds impunity for all."

Andrea Germanos ·

Social Democrats, Greens Eye Coalition After Outgoing Merkel's Bloc Ousted in German Elections

Citing the need to act on the climate crisis, center-left SPD leader Olaf Scholz declared that "voters have clearly spoken."

Jon Queally ·

Trump's CIA Considered Kidnapping or Assassinating Assange: Report

"The Biden administration must drop its charges against Assange immediately."

Jake Johnson ·

'Carrying Water for Big Corporations': Sinema Faces Backlash for Opposing Tax Hikes

"Make no mistake, if she sides with her wealthy donors and kills popular investments to jump-start the economy, everyday families—including across Arizona—will pay the price."

Jake Johnson ·

Support our work.

We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100% reader supported.

Subscribe to our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values.
Direct to your inbox.

Subscribe to our Newsletter.

Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit | Privacy Policy
Common Dreams Logo