Georgia Court Rules that Dynegy Coal Plant Must Regulate CO2 Emissions

A respected state court judge has ruled that CO2 emissions from a coal plant must be controlled under the Clean Air Act. This is the first time that the April 2, 2007 Supreme Court decision-- requiring the EPA to regulate CO2 emissions from industrial sources-- has been applied and it will have far-reaching implications nationwide. As Bruce Nilles, Sierra Club leader of the National Coal Campaign said, "In one swift decision, it changes the debate around global warming regulation in the United States because it now means that every coal plant has to consider its CO2 impacts."

On June 30, 2008 Fulton County Superior Court Judge Thelma Wyatt Cummings Moore issued a decision reversing the approval of Dynegy Inc.'s Longleaf 1200 megawatt coal-fired power plant planned on the banks of the Chattahoochee River south of Columbus. In a far reaching victory for Sierra Club and Friends of the Chattahoochee, Inc., represented by Greenlaw, the judge overturned an administrative court's ruling that affirmed the state Environmental Protection Division's (EPD) decision to issue an air permit for the project. Judge Moore ruled that the EPD erred in issuing the air permit because Dynegy Inc. failed to identify technology to control carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions-- the leading greenhouse gas that causes global warming. The judge also ruled that Dynegy must consider IGCC technology and show that fine particulate matter (PM 2.5) emissions from the proposed plant would not violate National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

Dynegy has said that it will appeal the decision.

Timber Industry Withdraws Appeal, Sierra Club Victory for the Sequoias Stands Strong

June 10, 2008 was the day the Sierra Club was scheduled to defend the world’s largest trees - the giant sequoias - in the 9th Circuit federal appeals court. However, at the 11th hour, the timber industry withdrew their appeal, marking a critical victory in the fight against the Bush Administration's widely discredited strategy of boosting logging under the guise of preventing forest fires.

The last groves of giant sequoias lie scattered amidst the conifer forests on the western slopes of the southern Sierra Nevada mountains. At the end of his term, President Clinton established the Giant Sequoia National Monument to provide lasting protection to these cathedrals of nature. The Bush Administration, however, chose to propose logging in the Monument - under the familiar pretext of "fire prevention," even while the timber sales removed larger, fire-resistant trees. The Sierra Club challenged several individual logging projects and the Bush Administration's "Management Plan" for the Giant Sequoia Monument, in a critical test of the Administration's logging strategy.

The Sierra Club won in the trial court in 2006, but the timber industry appealed the decision. By choosing to withdraw their appeal, even the timber industry seems to be implicitly acknowledging that the Sierra Club’s efforts have brought the Bush Administration’s destructive pro-logging regime to a halt.

Read more about this case here!

Sierra Nevada Forests and Threatened Wildlife Gain Protection from Bush Admin Logging Plans

On May 14, 2008 the Sierra Club succeeded in putting a stop to the Bush administration’s plans to allow intensive logging in the scenic Sierra Nevada forests of California. A victory in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will protect large swaths of forests that are habitat for a diverse array of threatened wildlife. The Forest Service attempted to justify their plans to open up sensitive tracts to loggers by saying that the sale of timber is necessary to raise money for fire prevention. However, the Court saw through this rationale, vindicating the position of the Sierra Club and other groups that the Forest Service neglected to consider available alternatives. The fallacy of the Forest Service's approach is is backed up by the science. "Logging large trees away from populated areas does not address the real fire risk presented by more flammable understory growth near the forest floor," said Dr. Phil Rundel, Distinguished Professor of Biology at UCLA. "Fire scientists widely agree that logging can actually increase wildfire threats by eliminating large, fire-resistant trees and encouraging understory thickets that can ignite and spread wildfire into residential areas." Judge Noonan lists a number of means by which the Forest Service could obtain funding for fire management, other than by auctioning off the very forests that they are responsible for preserving.

The Sierra Club, along with the Center for Biological Diversity, Natural Resources Defense Council, The Wilderness Society, and Sierra Forest Legacy filed for an injunction to stop this project in September, 2007. This action came in response to the Forest Service’s announcement that it intended to advertise and award logging contracts for sites throughout the Sierra Nevada region. In October 2007, a California district court denied the Club’s motion; however, the Ninth Circuit’s ruling reverses the district court’s decision, and succeeds in preserving forest habitat that is critical to the survival of a number of already threatened animals and birds.

Read more about this case, including the latest news, here!