May, 12 2021, 12:00am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Peter Hart, Food & Water Watch, (732) 266-4932, phart@fwwatch.org
Jean Su, Center for Biological Diversity, (415) 770-3187, jsu@biologicaldiversity.org
Aisha Dukule, Friends of the Earth (202) 893-3502, adukule@foe.org
Jennifer Falcon, Indigenous Environmental Network, (218) 760-9958, jennifer@ienearth.org
Alexis Sutterman, California Environmental Justice Alliance, (714) 504-3794, alexis@caleja.org
650+ Groups Tell Congress: Leave Dirty Power Out of Clean Electricity Standard
Advocates warn national proposals could include fracked gas, carbon capture and storage, and biogas.
WASHINGTON
More than 650 national advocacy and grassroots groups sent a letter today calling on Congress to develop a truly clean, renewable, and just energy standard for electricity as part of an evolving infrastructure package.
To meet its climate goals, the Biden administration is expected to back a national Clean Electricity Standard (CES), which some advocates argue can pass under existing budget reconciliation rules.
But existing CES proposals from prominent Democrats allow for filthy and false solutions such as fracked gas, carbon capture and storage, and factory farm biogas, warn groups including Indigenous Environmental Network, Friends of the Earth, Center for Biological Diversity, Food & Water Watch, Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, California Environmental Justice Alliance, Oil Change International, and The Democracy Collaborative.
The letter points out that these technologies either fail to reduce emissions or, even worse, create additional pollution burdens in environmental justice communities, "perpetuating the deep racial, social, and ecological injustices of our current fossil-fueled energy system."
One leading CES proposal, the CLEAN Future Act from House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, allows fracked gas and other dirty energy sources to qualify for "clean" energy credits.
"Counting dirty power sources like fracked gas as clean energy is more than foolish--it is dangerous. There will never be technology that magically transforms these polluting practices, which means we'll be left in the same place that we started, as the climate crisis only intensifies," said Food & Water Watch Policy Director Mitch Jones. "The urgency requires clear, honest policies that reject the mistakes of the past and do not sacrifice frontline communities for the sake of political expediency. It's simple: Clean energy should be clean."
"An electricity standard that allows methane gas, biomass and carbon capture and storage only perpetuates the racism and energy violence already baked into the system," said Jean Su, Energy Justice director at the Center for Biological Diversity. "We can't just build back better. Justice requires we build back fossil free. Proven solutions like distributed solar and storage protect our air, boost climate resilience and safeguard our communities and wildlife. There's no reason to prop up the ailing fossil fuel and nuclear industries when opportunities for cheaper and safer renewable energies abound."
"We need a Renewable Energy Standard, not a fracking energy standard," said Lukas Ross, Program Manager at Friends of the Earth. "The science and justice demand renewables, not lifelines for fossil fuels and other false solutions like nuclear, biomass and carbon capture."
"Climate chaos is hurting local communities across Mother Earth, and we cannot wait for a just transition from fossil fuels. Natural gas, carbon capture storage and other fossil-based techno fixes, bioenergy and biomass, nuclear and other false solutions such as market-based accounting systems like carbon offsets perpetrate dirty and destructive energy generation," said Tom BK Goldtooth, Executive Director, Indigenous Environmental Network. "This country needs to enact a renewable electricity standard that would champion a just energy agenda creating an ambitious carve-out for rooftop and community solar and wind storage and other distributed energy resources. This has to be linked to reducing waste and energy consumption levels, making electricity affordable, and part of building Indigenous nations, rural and local economies."
"CEJA members and partner organizations have long held that a Just Transition to a regenerative, clean energy economy requires addressing the roots of the climate crisis," said Alexis Sutterman, Program Associate at the California Environmental Justice Alliance. "This means rejecting false solutions -- such as gas, biogas, and carbon capture -- that prop up the fossil fuel industry at the expense of frontline communities' health and safety. It also requires building the new through an unwavering commitment to genuinely clean, renewable energy and energy resources that prioritize benefits and opportunities for environmental justice communities."
"We need a renewable electricity standard that commits the United States to a transformation of our energy system towards solar, wind, and other renewable resources -- not false solutions like carbon capture and sequestration," said Johanna Bozuwa, Manager of the Climate & Energy Program at the Democracy Collaborative. "In particular, the United States should actively open up space for distributed renewables like rooftop solar so that we are building the most resilient and justice-centered energy system possible."
The letter calls for a truly renewable energy standard that reaches the goal of 100 percent renewable electricity by 2030, with an emphasis on distributed energy resources and storage. Such a plan should exclude polluting practices and unproven technologies like waste incineration, carbon capture, and factory farm biogas.
A recent analysis shows that over 60 percent of the electricity generated by gas power plants in 2019 could generate clean energy compliance credits even under the most aggressive existing CES proposal. A separate technical report highlights the failure of the CLEAN Future Act to meaningfully reduce emissions over the next decade and beyond.
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500LATEST 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