The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that global warming of greater than 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels will result in greater food insecurity, loss of forests and coral reefs, and greater competition for land and water resources. Keeping global warming below that target requires significant efforts to limit greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Natural gas systems account for 31 percent of methane emissions, a potent GHG, demanding careful consideration of a new natural gas project’s contribution to climate change compared to its benefits.
In New Jersey Conservation Foundation v. FERC, the D.C. Circuit found that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) approval of a natural gas pipeline project did not appropriately weigh GHG emissions as required by the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and the Natural Gas Act (NGA). The court found that in its cost-benefit analysis of the project, FERC did not apply a consistent or meaningful metric that appropriately weighed the harms of climate change coming from increased GHG emissions, as required by the NGA. Consideration of the harms of increased GHG emissions before a pipeline project is approved could provide a useful tool in slowing global warming.
