Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database

Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Department of Energy

Geography
Year
2023
Document Type
Litigation
Part of

About this case

Filing year
2023
Status
Petition for review filed.
Docket number
23-1214
Court/admin entity
United States → United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Cir.)United States → United States Federal Courts
Case category
State Law Claims (US) → Environmentalist Lawsuits (US)
Principal law
United States → National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)United States → Natural Gas Act
At issue
Document with title of Sierra Club v. U.S. Department of Energy
Topics
,

Documents

Each case in our database can contain one or more documents.

Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
08/11/2023
Petition for review filed.
Center for Biological Diversity and Sierra Club filed a petition for review in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) April 2023 order approving exports of liquefied natural gas from the Alaska LNG Project and a DOE order denying rehearing of the April 2023 order. In a press release announcing the lawsuit, an attorney for one of the petitioner organizations said that “[t]his expensive, climate-polluting project is not in the public interest—it is a boondoggle that would undermine the Biden administration’s climate goals and needlessly lay waste to Alaska’s lands and waters, imperiling communities and threatening wildlife.” The petitioners’ request for rehearing contended that the following errors related to climate change impacts were present in the supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) and April 2023 order: (1) the determination that the Alaska LNG Project’s exports were consistent with the public interest was arbitrary and capricious and violated the Natural Gas Act because DOE used “alleged uncertainties … to justify discounting the Project’s climate harms” while ignoring the alleged uncertainties in accounting for the Project’s benefits; DOE overstated the degree of uncertainty about adverse impacts to the climate; and DOE could not ignore the Project’s adverse climate impacts even if the Project substituted for foreign fossil fuels; and (2) the SEIS violated NEPA because it did not comply with NEPA regulations regarding missing information; it made unsupported assumptions about byproduct carbon dioxide injection; it did not adequately address impacts from proposed carbon storage; it did not adequately address methane leakage; and the analysis of overseas impacts was inadequate.
Petition

Summary

Challenge to the approval of exports of liquefied natural gas from the Alaska LNG Project.

 Topics mentioned most in this case

See how often Topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document.

Group
Topics
Fossil fuel