A federal judge ruled Monday that New York cannot enforce its landmark “climate Superfund” law. (Photo by Anne-Marie Caruso/New Jersey Monitor)
A federal judge ruled Monday that New York cannot enforce its landmark “climate Superfund” law, a measure that sought to charge fossil fuel companies $75 billion over 25 years to help the state deal with the costs of climate change.
While the legal battle is far from over, the ruling could give pause to lawmakers in many other states who have been considering similar legislation.
Chief Judge Brenda Sannes of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York ruled that New York’s 2024 law is preempted by the federal Clean Air Act, calling the measure “simply beyond the limits of state law.” Fossil fuel companies have long argued that federal regulations governing emissions supersede states’ authority to punish companies for their role in causing climate change.
“It is precisely because the (state) Climate Act operates within an area of law ‘in which the federal interest is so dominant’ that it cannot be enforced,” Sannes wrote in her ruling.
The case against New York’s law was brought by fossil fuel companies and the attorneys general of 22 Republican-led states.
“This is a major victory in the fight against liberal states, trying to balance their budgets on the backs of our hard-working men and women in the coal, oil and gas industries,” West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey said in a statement.
Environmental advocates called on New York Attorney General Letitia James to appeal the ruling.
“The fossil fuel industry would like nothing more than for one district court ruling in New York to scare lawmakers across the country into backing down, but this decision doesn’t bind other states or stop them from passing their own laws,” Cassidy DiPaola, communications director for Make Polluters Pay, an advocacy campaign supporting climate Superfund bills and lawsuits against fossil fuel companies.
“New York should fight this ruling, and every other state should keep moving until we make polluters pay their fair share.”
New York was the second state to pass a climate Superfund law, following a measure in Vermont. A lawsuit against Vermont’s law is still pending.
The laws are modeled on the federal Superfund program, which requires polluters to pay for the cleanup of toxic waste sites.
Lawmakers in at least 12 other states have proposed similar bills this session, although none has advanced so far. While the policy has gained significant attention and support in recent years, experts said that some legislators were likely waiting to see how the legal battles over the New York and Vermont laws would play out.
This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Wisconsin Examiner, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
On the night of Jan. 2, there was an explosion on a well pad in eastern Ohio’s Guernsey County. In shaky Facebook videos, the volunteer fire department chief warned off “looky-loos,” as a burning tank fed dark, billowing clouds of smoke off in the distance.
The accident happened at the Groh well pad which is operated by Gulfport Engergy. No one was injured in the blast and first responders determined the safest course of action was to let the fire burn itself out. Guernsey County Emergency Management Agency issued an evacuation notice within half a mile of the well pad. The agency lifted its advisory about 14 hours later.
In a statement, Ohio Department of Natural Resources spokeswoman Karina Cheung said the agency is still investigating the cause of the fire and assessing damage.
“Preliminary findings indicate that one containment tank was affected,” she said. “All produced fluids have been safely removed. There was no release of fluids into the environment and the well pad remains shut down and inactive.”
“There were no reported injuries, no reported impacts to wildlife, and no reported impacts to water,” she added.
Context and track record
But to some, the incident highlights concerns they’ve been raising for years about oil and gas drilling — particularly as exploration expands to state lands.
The Groh well pad sits about five miles from Salt Fork State Park. While the site doesn’t draw from within the park, the accident is a reminder that Salt Fork was recently opened to oil and gas exploration thanks to a 2022 law signed by Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine.
Those leases don’t allow well pads within the boundaries of state land, but opponents argue more exploration means more accidents. And with drilling infrastructure creeping closer, they contend, it’s a matter of time before those accidents affect public land.
“These are accidents that have great potential to cause people serious breathing and respiratory illnesses from air emissions alone,” Melinda Zemper from the organization Save Ohio Parks said.
Although she’s quick to note the difference in scale, Zemper compared the accident to the 2023 train derailment in East Palestine.
“Sometimes when you have explosions,” she added, “you don’t know what chemicals are going to be released into the soil and the water nearby the well pad.”
The group has organized opposition to drilling leases on public land since state officials began awarding them through the Ohio Department of Natural Resources’ Oil and Gas Land Management Commission.
Gulfport Energy has been awarded seven of those leases in Belmont and Monroe Counties.
Save Ohio Parks argues the recent Groh well pad fire isn’t an isolated incident.
In 2020, Gulfport agreed to a $3.7 million settlement with the U.S. EPA over its operations in Ohio. The company faced $1.7 million in penalties and was directed to invest $2 million in upgrades to reduce emissions at its facilities. The company has also had several accidents in Ohio, primarily related to spilling brine or other drilling fluid. In 2013, state officials fined the company a quarter million dollars over leaks at seven well pads in Belmont and Harrison Counties.
Ohio Capital Journal reached out to Gulfport Energy but got no response.
Accidents and reporting
Taking a step back, the organization FracTracker argued the Groh well pad explosion is a symptom of a broader problem. In an analysis of incident records from 2015 to 2023, Gwen Klenke found at least 1,900 well-related incidents reported in Ohio.
“I think the larger context is just that this industry is prone to accidents,” she said, “and that there will be accidents as we start to frack and extract on state lands — not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when.”
The bulk of incidents Klenke documented have to do with release or discharge — of gas, brine or other chemicals involved in drilling. Nearly 160 of those incidents are classified as explosions or fires, but only two reference injury or property damage. Under ODNR designations, only three incidents are classified as major or severe since 2018.
Ohio Oil and Gas Association President Rob Rob Brundrett points to the lack of major incidents as “a testament to the industry’s rigorous safety standards and practices.”
“Considering that only .004 percent of ALL Ohio oil and gas operations have had a major reportable incident during that timeframe, I have, and will continue to, put our industry’s safety numbers against any other labor-intensive industry in Ohio,” he added.
But Klenke argues that low number of major incidents points to shortcomings in reporting and classification rather than a strong safety record. Kathiann Kowalski from the Energy News Network highlighted ODNR’s classification system in a 2023 report as well.
The agency relies on a matrix to determine the severity of an incident, but its criteria are subjective and complex. Does the burned-out tank at the Groh well pad constitute “moderate” or “major” on-site equipment damage? If the fire burned for at least 14 hours, does that push it into the category of a major incident (12-24 hours to control impact) or does the apparent lack of off-site spillage ratchet it down to a minor incident?
In her report, Klenke points to two other incidents involving explosions at homes that involved injuries. Because the reporting system allows just one category, they were listed as “explosion/fire,” but they could’ve also been listed as “injury” or “property damage” among other designations.
Klenke explained neither incident was listed as “major” or “severe” under ODNR’s designations.
“They were calling those moderate or minor explosions,” she said, “when those should really be considered major if they’re damaging property, they’re damaging folks’ health.”
Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com.
Login
