July, 29 2016, 11:45am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jeremy Nichols, WildEarth Guardians, jnichols@wildearthguardians.org
Michael Saul, Center for Biological Diversity, msaul@biologicaldiversity.org
Denni Cawley, Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment, dcawleyuphe@gmail.com
Mariel Nanasi, New Energy Economy, mariel@seedsbeneaththesnow.com
Kyle Tisdel, Western Environmental Law Center, tisdel@westernlaw.org
Kaitlin Butler, Science and Environmental Health Network, kaitlin@sehn.org
To Protect Climate, Public Health, Americans Call for End to Federal Coal Program
Ending Public Coal Leasing, Mining Would Keep 212 Million Tons of Carbon in Ground, Save $7 Trillion
WASHINGTON
A coalition of groups today called on President Obama to permanently end the federal coal program, highlighting the fact that ending leasing and mining of public coal in the United States would keep up to 212 billion metric tons of carbon pollution in the ground -- the equivalent of taking nearly 50 billion cars off the road and saving society more than $7 trillion in avoided climate damages.
"If we have any chance of avoiding the worst consequences of global warming, we have to move away from fossil fuels," said Jeremy Nichols, WildEarth Guardians' climate and energy program director. "This shift starts with reining in the mining of our publicly owned coal and helping coal-dependent communities transition to more prosperous and sustainable economies."
The new figures were part of detailed comments submitted today at the close of the public scoping period for the comprehensive review and potential reform of the federal coal-leasing program. In response to mounting controversy, including the climate impacts from burning coal, Interior Secretary Sally Jewell kicked off the reform process in January, announcing a temporary moratorium on new leasing and the initiation of a full environmental review of the federal coal program. While the review is underway, Jewell has ordered a pause in significant new coal-leasing decisions on public lands.
Halting federal coal leasing and mining will have significant benefits to the climate as well as people and the environment. Among the more than $7 trillion in savings from stopping public coal leasing in the United States are savings in terms of human health costs and infrastructure damage caused by climate-driven events.
The groups today, representing local, regional and national environmental and health organizations, also sent a letter to President Obama summarizing the specific requests for reforms in how publicly owned coal is managed, including an end to the federal coal program altogether, which would keep up to 212 billion metric tons of carbon in the ground, according to a recent report by EcoShift, prepared for the Center for Biological Diversity and Friends of the Earth.
Based on conservative carbon-cost estimates that place the value of a metric ton of carbon dioxide at $37, future coal leasing and mining threaten to saddle society with more than $7 trillion in damages and health-related costs.
"The science is clear that there's no reasonable path to avoiding the worst effects of climate change without the phaseout of coal mining and combustion," said Michael Saul, a senior attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. "We can't do that while simultaneously committing to massive new coal mining into the 2040s and beyond. It's time for the Department of the Interior to start being honest with itself and American communities and shift policies now for a clean and sustainable future."
Currently more than 40 percent of all coal produced in the United States comes from publicly owned reserves that have been leased and are managed by the Department of the Interior. The vast majority of this coal is in the American West. When mined and burned, this coal is responsible for more than 10 percent of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
The groups' letter comes as global warming is taking a tremendous toll on society, fueling rising temperatures, worsening droughts in the American West, threatening public health and risking billions in damages to U.S. national parks and other public lands. It also comes amid growing public support for keeping fossil fuels in the ground as a means to combat climate change.
"The climate crisis is now widely regarding by medical organizations throughout the world as the greatest public health threat of the 21st century," said Brian Moench, president of the board of directors for Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment. "We are already seeing the consequences of hotter temperatures, worsening air pollution, more insect-borne diseases, food insecurity and water contamination and scarcity. Those trends will become much worse if we fail to act."
Last year scientists reported that to rein in global temperature increases, more than 90 percent of all coal reserves in the United States would have to remain untouched. Further reports have found more than 100 million metric tons of carbon pollution stands to be prevented annuallyby keeping publicly owned fossil fuels in the ground.
Another recent study found that making permanent the moratorium on new coal leasing in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming and Montana-- the largest coal-producing region in the nation -- could significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions while still meeting foreseeable power demands. The fact is that current federal coal leases will last through 2040 and issuing any new leases is incompatible with meeting the U.S. commitment to the Paris agreement to limit global warming.
The groups joining the letter to President Obama include WildEarth Guardians, the Center for Biological Diversity, Rainforest Action Network, Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment, New Energy Economy, Montana Environmental Information Center, Western Environmental Law Center, Grand Canyon Trust, Science and Environmental Health Network and Great Old Broads for Wilderness.
While the coalition today is calling for reforms to lead to the end of the federal coal program, the groups' letter also joined thousands of Americans in calling on the Obama administration to ensure a "just transition" away from coal, to provide assistance to communities for economic planning and development and to prioritize transition as a reform goal.
The Interior Department expects to release an interim report by the end of 2016 with conclusions from its public process.
Additional Group Statements
"If science, not politics, is the guide for the decision on public lands management then the issue is absolutely clear: the federal coal-leasing program must be terminated," said Mariel Nanasi, executive director of the New Mexico-based New Energy Economy. "It's time for the administration to put science and our future ahead of politics and protect our climate."
"There is a fundamental disconnect between President Obama's recognition that we need to take immediate action on climate change and how our public lands are managed for energy production, particularly coal," said Kyle Tisdel, attorney and climate and energy program director with the Western Environmental Law Center. "If we are to stem the most catastrophic impacts from a warming planet, as well as dramatic impacts to our communities and public health, the transformation must start by reforming the federal coal program."
"In coal country, like Utah where I'm from, the legacy spans more than a century. Local coal jobs mean income to support family, benefits and getting to work close to home. The hard facts are that only a handful of people benefit while the majority of the costs -- health, environmental, economic -- are borne by frontline workers and communities, and will be felt by generations to come," said Kaitlin Butler, program director, Extreme Energy program of the Science and Environmental Health Network. "Ending coal in coal country is hard, complicated. Climate change is straightforward; we have a big-time problem that calls for urgent action, status-quo is catastrophic. A Just Transition is a way to confront the roots of the climate crisis, which are the roots of an extractive economy; it's about the future of the planet and a new economy. President Obama and Secretary Jewell, you have the opportunity to be proactive and visionary and begin to shift this legacy of debts in a real way. It's hard and important. And it's the only way forward."
Detailed comments submitted today by the Center for Biological Diversity can be downloaded here.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252LATEST NEWS
National Team Member Becomes at Least 265th Palestinian Footballer Killed by Israel in Gaza
Muhannad al-Lili's killing by Israeli airstrike came as the world mourned the death of Portugal and Liverpool star Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva in a car crash in Spain.
Jul 04, 2025
Muhannad Fadl al-Lili, captain of the Al-Maghazi Services Club and a member of Palestine's national football team, died Thursday from injuries suffered during an Israeli airstrike on his family home in the central Gaza Strip earlier this week, making him the latest of hundreds of Palestinian athletes killed since the start of Israel's genocidal onslaught.
Al-Maghazi Services Club announced al-Lili's death in a Facebook tribute offering condolences to "his family, relatives, friends, and colleagues" and asking "Allah to shower him with his mercy."
The Palestine Football Association (PFA) said that "on Monday, a drone fired a missile at Muhannad's room on the third floor of his house, which led to severe bleeding in the skull."
"During the war of extermination against our people, Muhannad tried to travel outside Gaza to catch up with his wife, who left the strip for Norway on a work mission before the outbreak of the war," the association added. "But he failed to do so, and was deprived of seeing his eldest son, who was born outside the Gaza Strip."
According to the PFA, al-Lili is at least the 265th Palestinian footballer and 585th athlete to be killed by Israeli forces since they launched their assault and siege on Gaza following the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. Sports journalist Leyla Hamed says 439 Palestinian footballers have been killed by Israel.
Overall, Israel's war—which is the subject of an International Court of Justice (ICJ) genocide case—has left more than 206,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing, and around 2 million more forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened, according to Gaza officials.
The Palestine Chronicle contrasted the worldwide press coverage of the car crash deaths of Portuguese footballer Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva with the media's relative silence following al-Lili's killing.
"Jota's death was a tragedy that touched millions," the outlet wrote. "Yet the death of Muhannad al-Lili... was met with near-total silence from global sports media."
Last week, a group of legal experts including two United Nations special rapporteurs appealed to the Fédération Internationale de Football Association, the world football governing body, demanding that its Governance Audit and Compliance Committee take action against the Israel Football Association for violating FIFA rules by playing matches on occupied Palestinian territory.
In July 2024, the ICJ found that Israel's then-57-year occupation of Palestine—including Gaza—is an illegal form of apartheid that should be ended as soon as possible.
During their invasion and occupation of Gaza, Israeli forces have also used sporting facilities including Yarmouk Stadium for the detention of Palestinian men, women, and children—many of whom have reported torture and other abuse at the hands of their captors.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Highly Inspiring' Court Ruling Affirms Nations' Legal Duty to Combat Climate Emergency
"While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections," said one observer.
Jul 04, 2025
In a landmark advisory opinion published Thursday, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights—of which the United States, the world's second-biggest carbon polluter, is not a member—affirmed the right to a stable climate and underscored nations' duty to act to protect it and address the worsening planetary emergency.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change," a summary of the 234-page ruling states. "Any rollback of climate or environmental policies that affect human rights must be exceptional, duly justified based on objective criteria, and comply with standards of necessity and proportionality."
"The court also held that... states must take all necessary measures to reduce the risks arising, on the one hand, from the degradation of the global climate system and, on the other, from exposure and vulnerability to the effects of such degradation," the summary adds.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change."
The case was brought before the Costa-Rica based IACtHR by Chile and Colombia, both of which "face the daily challenge of dealing with the consequences of the climate emergency, including the proliferation of droughts, floods, landslides, and fires, among others."
"These phenomena highlight the need to respond urgently and based on the principles of equity, justice, cooperation, and sustainability, with a human rights-based approach," the court asserted.
IACtHR President Judge Nancy Hernández López said following the ruling that "states must not only refrain from causing significant environmental damage but have the positive obligation to take measures to guarantee the protection, restoration, and regeneration of ecosystems."
"Causing massive and irreversible environmental harm...alters the conditions for a healthy life on Earth to such an extent that it creates consequences of existential proportions," she added. "Therefore, it demands universal and effective legal responses."
The advisory opinion builds on two landmark decisions last year. In April 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Swiss government violated senior citizens' human rights by refusing to abide by scientists' warnings to rapidly phase out fossil fuel production.
The following month, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea found in an advisory opinion that greenhouse gas emissions are marine pollution under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and that signatories to the accord "have the specific obligation to adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce, and control" them.
The IACtHR advisory opinion is expected to boost climate and human rights lawsuits throughout the Americas, and to impact talks ahead of November's United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP30, in Belém, Brazil.
Climate defenders around the world hailed Thursday's advisory opinion, with United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk calling it "a landmark step forward for the region—and beyond."
"As the impact of climate change becomes ever more visible across the world, the court is clear: People have a right to a stable climate and a healthy environment," Türk added. "States have a bedrock obligation under international law not to take steps that cause irreversible climate and environmental damage, and they have a duty to act urgently to take the necessary measures to protect the lives and rights of everyone—both those alive now and the interests of future generations."
Amnesty International head of strategic litigation Mandi Mudarikwa said, "Today, the Inter-American Court affirmed and clarified the obligations of states to respect, ensure, prevent, and cooperate in order to realize human rights in the context of the climate crisis."
"Crucially, the court recognized the autonomous right to a healthy climate for both individuals and communities, linked to the right to a healthy environment," Mudarikwa added. "The court also underscored the obligation of states to protect cross-border climate-displaced persons, including through the issuance of humanitarian visas and protection from deportation."
Delta Merner, lead scientist at the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement that "this opinion sets an important precedent affirming that governments have a legal duty to regulate corporate conduct that drives climate harm."
"Though the United States is not a party to the treaty governing the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, this opinion should be a clarion call for transnational fossil fuel companies that have deceived the public for decades about the risks of their products," Merner added. "The era of accountability is here."
Markus Gehring, a fellow and director of studies in law at Hughes Hall at the University of Cambridge in England, called the advisory opinion "highly inspiring" and "seminal."
Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans at Earthjustice, said that "the Inter-American Court's ruling makes clear that climate change is an overriding threat to human rights in the world."
"Governments must act to cut carbon emissions drastically," Caputo stressed. "While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections for all from the realities of climate harm."
Climate litigation is increasing globally in the wake of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. In the Americas, Indigenous peoples, children, and green groups are among those who have been seeking climate justice via litigation.
However, in the United States, instead of acknowledging the climate emergency, President Donald Trump has declared an "energy emergency" while pursuing a "drill, baby, drill" policy of fossil fuel extraction and expansion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Quietly Approves Massive Crude Oil Expansion Project
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest," said one environmental attorney.
Jul 04, 2025
The Trump administration has quietly fast-tracked a massive oil expansion project that environmentalists and Democratic lawmakers warned could have a destructive impact on local communities and the climate.
As reported recently by the Oil and Gas Journal, the plan "involves expanding the Wildcat Loadout Facility, a key transfer point for moving Uinta basin crude oil to rail lines that transport it to refineries along the Gulf Coast."
The goal of the plan is to transfer an additional 70,000 barrels of oil per day from the Wildcat Loadout Facility, which is located in Utah, down to the Gulf Coast refineries via a route that runs along the Colorado River. Controversially, the Trump administration is also plowing ahead with the project by invoking emergency powers to address energy shortages despite the fact that the United States for the last couple of years has been producing record levels of domestic oil.
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) issued a joint statement condemning the Trump administration's push to approve the project while rushing through environmental impact reviews.
"The Bureau of Land Management's decision to fast-track the Wildcat Loadout expansion—a project that would transport an additional 70,000 barrels of crude oil on train tracks along the Colorado River—using emergency procedures is profoundly flawed," the Colorado Democrats said. "These procedures give the agency just 14 days to complete an environmental review—with no opportunity for public input or administrative appeal—despite the project's clear risks to Colorado. There is no credible energy emergency to justify bypassing public involvement and environmental safeguards. The United States is currently producing more oil and gas than any country in the world."
On Thursday, the Bureau of Land Management announced the completion of its accelerated environmental review of the project, drawing condemnation from climate advocates.
Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, described the administration's rush to approve the project as "pure hubris," especially given its "refusal to hear community concerns about oil spill risks." She added that "this fast-tracked review breezed past vital protections for clean air, public safety and endangered species."
Landon Newell, staff attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, accused the Trump administration of manufacturing an energy emergency to justify plans that could have a dire impact on local habitats.
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest by authorizing the transport of more than 1 billion gallons annually of additional oil on railcars traveling alongside the Colorado River," he said. "Any derailment and oil spill would have a devastating impact on the Colorado River and the communities and ecosystems that rely upon it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular