Courts levy new costs on energy project protests By EPN Staff Recent high-profile court decisions have put a dent in the climate change protest movement, leading environmental groups to reconsider the costs of litigation and giving industry advocates hope for fewer delays for major projects. A federal judge in April awarded the state of North Dakota $28 million from the federal government, finding that the U.S Army Corps of Engineers should have pushed back harder against protestors during 2016 and 2017 rallies that delayed the Dakota Access Pipeline. That decision followed a major decision in March, when a jury levied a nearly $667 million verdict against Greenpeace for its role in the Dakota protests, finding that several arms of the environmental group worked to delay the pipeline. Why it matters The court cases that led to these rulings highlighted some of the substantial costs protest campaigns can bring for developers and governments. The Dakota Access Pipeline protests generated some 700 arrests and sucked up extensive resources from 178 agencies over seven months of protests. The $28 million award is meant to cover the state’s costs. The largest protest camp was on land managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the judge in this case said the Corps could have prevented millions in damages if it had removed protestors or required them to handle cleanup and other impacts by enforcing a permit. During separate court proceedings over the pipeline project, Energy Transfer, the Texas company behind the pipeline, said at one point that each month's delay cost $80 million. A big slice of North Dakota’s economy relies on oil and natural gas, which support more than 72,000 jobs representing more than $5.5 billion in annual wages, according to the American Petroleum Institute. The Greenpeace verdict wasn’t calculated off the impact of the demonstrations themselves but came because the jury found Greenpeace defamed Energy Transfer. The Greenpeace verdict may bankrupt the group. While its leadership has said the organization will appeal and that it will continue to fight fossil fuel projects, but both cases may deter future protests. The bigger picture Large scale environmental protests, and the backlash against them, aren’t just a domestic issue. Last year activists from Just Stop Oil were sentenced to prison for orchestrating a blockade of the M25 motorway in London. The four-and-five-year sentences for group leaders were the longest ever given in the UK for non-violent protest, according to The Guardian. Additional details Environmentalists have also turned to the courts to argue against permits and environmental regulations and to argue that governments and companies should be held liable for climate change. The Colorado Supreme Court is mulling a case now that a county commission brought against Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy, alleging they misled the public about oil and gas’ impact on the climate. A town in North Carolina has sued Duke Energy in a similar case, accusing the company of deception. A long-running case filed by young people accusing the U.S. government of violating their right to a healthy climate essentially ended in March when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take it up.
