Latest news with #EnvironmentalGroups
CTV News
8 hours ago
- Business
- CTV News
Dresden landfill bill fast tracked at Queen's Park
Dresden landfill bill fast tracked at Queen's Park Provincial legislation to help fast-track a highly contentious landfill in Dresden, Ont. was passed on Wednesday.
CTV News
7 days ago
- Business
- CTV News
U.S. Supreme Court backs Utah oil railroad expansion and scales back a key environmental law
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday backed a multibillion-dollar oil railroad expansion in Utah, in a ruling that scales back a key environmental law. The 8-0 decision comes after an appeal to the high court from backers of the project, which is aimed at quadrupling oil production in the remote area of sandstone and sagebrush. Environmental groups said the decision would have sweeping impacts on National Environmental Policy Act reviews across the country. The Trump administration has already said it's speeding up that process after the president vowed to boost U.S. oil and gas development. The case centers on the Uinta Basin Railway, a proposed 88-mile (142-kilometre) expansion that would connect oil and gas producers to the broader rail network and allow them to access larger markets. The justices reversed a lower court decision and restored a critical approval from federal regulators on the Surface Transportation Board. The project could still face additional legal and regulatory hurdles. Environmental groups and a Colorado county had argued that regulators must consider a broad range of potential impacts when they consider new development, such as increased wildfire risk, the effect of additional crude oil production from the area and increased refining in Gulf states. The justices, though, found that regulators were right to consider the direct effects of the project, rather than the wider upstream and downstream impact. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote that courts should defer to regulators on 'where to draw the line' on what factors to take into account. Four other conservative justices joined his opinion. 'Simply stated, NEPA is a procedural cross-check, not a substantive roadblock,' he wrote of the policy act reviews. 'The goal of the law is to inform agency decision making, not to paralyze it.' The court's conservative majority court has taken steps to curtail the power of federal regulators in other cases, including striking down the decades-old Chevron doctrine that made it easier for the federal government to set a wide range of regulations. Justice Sonia Sotomayor agreed with the outcome, but with a narrower legal reasoning. In a decision joined by her two liberal colleagues, she said the court could have simply cleared the way for the railway approval by finding the board didn't need to take into account any harm caused by the oil that might eventually be carried on the railway. Justice Neil Gorsuch did not participate in the case after facing calls to step aside over ties to Philip Anschutz, a Colorado billionaire whose ownership of oil wells in the area means he could benefit if the project goes through. Gorsuch, as a lawyer in private practice, had represented Anschutz. The ruling comes after President Donald Trump's vow to boost U.S. oil and gas drilling and move away from former President Joe Biden's focus on climate change. The administration announced last month it's speeding up environmental reviews of projects required under the same law at the center of the Utah case, compressing a process that typically takes a year or more into just weeks. 'The court's decision gives agencies a green light to ignore the reasonably foreseeable consequences of their decisions and avoid confronting them,' said Sambhav Sankar, senior vice president of programs at Earthjustice. Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, said opponents would continue to fight the Utah project. 'This disastrous decision to undermine our nation's bedrock environmental law means our air and water will be more polluted, the climate and extinction crises will intensify, and people will be less healthy,' she said. Article written by Lindsay Whitehurst, The Associated Press
Fast Company
29-05-2025
- Business
- Fast Company
Supreme Court clears way for Utah oil project, scaling back a key environmental law
The Supreme Court backed a multibillion-dollar oil railroad expansion in Utah Thursday in a ruling that scales back a key environmental law for projects around the country. The 8-0 decision comes after an appeal to the high court from backers of the project, which is aimed at quadrupling oil production in the remote area of sandstone and sagebrush. Environmental groups said the decision would have sweeping impacts on National Environmental Policy Act reviews. The Trump administration has already said it's speeding up that process after the president vowed to boost U.S. oil and gas development. The case centers on the Uinta Basin Railway, a proposed 88-mile (142-kilometer) expansion that would connect oil and gas producers to the broader rail network and allow them to access larger markets. Supporters have argued that streamlining environmental reviews would speed up development. The justices reversed a lower court decision and restored a critical approval from federal regulators on the Surface Transportation Board. The project could still face additional legal and regulatory hurdles. Environmental groups and a Colorado county had argued that regulators must consider a broad range of potential impacts when they consider new development, such as increased wildfire risk, the effect of additional crude oil production from the area and increased refining in Gulf states. The justices, though, found that regulators were right to consider the direct effects of the project, rather than the wider upstream and downstream impact. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote that courts should defer to regulators on 'where to draw the line' on what factors to take into account. Four other conservative justices joined his opinion. 'Simply stated, NEPA is a procedural cross-check, not a substantive roadblock,' he wrote of the policy act reviews. 'The goal of the law is to inform agency decision making, not to paralyze it.' The court's conservative majority court has taken steps to curtail the power of federal regulators in other cases, including striking down the decades-old Chevron doctrine that made it easier for the federal government to set a wide range of regulations. Justice Sonia Sotomayor agreed with the outcome, but with a narrower legal reasoning. In a decision joined by her two liberal colleagues, she said the court could have simply cleared the way for the railway approval by finding the board didn't need to take into account any harm caused by the oil that might eventually be carried on the railway. Justice Neil Gorsuch did not participate in the case after facing calls to step aside over ties to Philip Anschutz, a Colorado billionaire whose ownership of oil wells in the area means he could benefit if the project goes through. Gorsuch, as a lawyer in private practice, had represented Anschutz. The ruling comes after President Donald Trump's vow to boost U.S. oil and gas drilling and move away from former President Joe Biden's focus on climate change. The administration announced last month it's speeding up environmental reviews of projects required under the same law at the center of the Utah case, compressing a process that typically takes a year or more into just weeks. 'The court's decision gives agencies a green light to ignore the reasonably foreseeable consequences of their decisions and avoid confronting them,' said Sambhav Sankar, senior vice president of programs at Earthjustice. Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, said opponents would continue to fight the Utah project. 'This disastrous decision to undermine our nation's bedrock environmental law means our air and water will be more polluted, the climate and extinction crises will intensify, and people will be less healthy,' she said. The project's public partner applauded the ruling. 'It represents a turning point for rural Utah — bringing safer, sustainable, more efficient transportation options, and opening new doors for investment and economic stability,' said Keith Heaton, director of the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition.
The Guardian
29-05-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
US supreme court sides with Utah railway project challenged by environmentalists
The US supreme court bolstered on Thursday a Utah railway project intended to transport crude oil, ruling against environmental groups and a Colorado county that had challenged its federal approval. The 8-0 ruling overturned a lower court's decision that had halted the project and had faulted an environmental impact statement issued by a federal agency called the Surface Transportation Board in approving the railway as too limited in scope. A coalition of seven Utah counties and an infrastructure investment group are seeking to construct an 88-mile (142km) railway line in north-eastern Utah to connect the sparsely populated Uinta Basin region to an existing freight rail network that would be used primarily to transport waxy crude oil. The case tested the scope of environmental impact studies that federal agencies must conduct under a US law called the National Environmental Policy Act, enacted in 1970 to prevent environmental harms that might result from major projects. The law mandates that agencies examine the 'reasonably foreseeable' effects of a project. The supreme court heard arguments on 10 December in the case, which has been closely watched by companies and environmental groups for how the ruling might affect a wider range of infrastructure and energy projects. Environmental reviews that are too broad in scope can add years to the regulatory timeline, risking a project's viability and future infrastructure development, according to companies and business trade groups. The Surface Transportation Board, which has regulatory authority over new railroad lines, issued an environmental impact statement and approved the railway proposal in 2021. The Center for Biological Diversity and other environmental groups sued over approval, as did Colorado's Eagle county, which noted that the project would increase train traffic in its region and double traffic on an existing rail line along the Colorado River. The US court of appeals for the District of Columbia circuit ruled in favor of the challengers in 2023, concluding that the environmental review inadequately analyzed the effects of increased oil production in the basin as well as downstream, where the oil would be refined. Democratic former president Joe Biden's administration had backed the railway coalition in the case, as did the state of Utah. Fifteen other states supported the challengers. Colorado said its economy relies on outdoor recreation, and that the project raises the risk of leaks, spills or rail car accidents near the Colorado River's headwaters. Conservative justice Neil Gorsuch recused himself from the case after some Democratic lawmakers urged his withdrawal because businessman Philip Anschutz, his former legal client, has a financial interest in its outcome.
Washington Post
29-05-2025
- Business
- Washington Post
Supreme Court backs Utah oil railroad expansion, endorsing limited version of key environmental law
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court backed a multibillion-dollar oil railroad expansion in Utah on Thursday, endorsing a limited interpretation of a key environmental law. The unanimous decision comes after an appeal to the high court from backers of the project, which is aimed at quadrupling oil production in the remote area of sandstone and sagebrush. The backers said limiting the scope of environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act would speed up development. The case centers on the Uinta Basin Railway, a proposed 88-mile (142-kilometer) expansion that would connect oil and gas producers to the broader rail network, allowing them to access larger markets. The justices reversed a lower court decision and restored a critical approval from federal regulators on the Surface Transportation Board. The project could still face additional legal and regulatory hurdles. Environmental groups and a Colorado county had argued that regulators must consider a broad range of potential impacts when they consider new development.
