Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy v. Holsten

The Minnesota Court of Appeals rejected a challenge to the environmental impact statement (EIS) for a proposed steel production plant. The challengers alleged that the EIS was inadequate since did not include a substantial discussion of the project’s projected greenhouse emissions. The court held that the challenge was without merit, finding that the EIS adequately addressed the plant’s projected greenhouse gas emissions and its effect on climate change. The court found that the EIS included a carbon footprint section that acknowledged the proposed plant’s emissions and that there were no regulations concerning greenhouse gas emissions.

The plaintiff, an environmental advocacy group, filed suit in state court against the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources alleging that it did not adequately consider the amount of greenhouse gases a proposed $1.65 billion direct taconite-to-steel plant would produce when it approved an environmental impact statement (EIS) concerning the plant.  The state court upheld the EIS, holding that the state agency followed the law when drafting the EIS. The environmental advocacy group appealed the ruling.