Search Results
Use the filters on the left-hand side of this screen to refine the results further by topic or document type.
The Public’s Interest and Durable Management of Energy Development on Public Lands
The United States owns, on behalf of all Americans, approximately 30% of the nation’s land, totaling more than 600 million acres. These lands are overseen by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI).
Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Savage
In an unpublished opinion, the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and remanded in part a district court order that lifted an injunction on a logging project in the Kootenai National Forest. Environmental groups sought to enjoin the project again, arguing that the Forest Service's analysis of the project...
No New Fossil Fuel Leasing: The Only Path to Maximizing Social Welfare in the Climate Change Era
In Federal Lands and Fossil Fuels: Maximizing Social Welfare in Federal Energy Leasing, Prof. Jayni Foley Hein assesses inefficiencies in the federal fossil fuel leasing program that lead to the over-extraction of fossil fuels at great societal cost. In recognition of the U.S. Department of the Interior’s (DOI's) role in stewarding federal lands for the long-term benefit of the American people, Hein proposes that DOI should adopt a policy of seeking to maximize social welfare or “net public benefits” in its leasing decisions.
Federal Lands and Fossil Fuels: Maximizing Social Welfare in Federal Energy Leasing
The externality costs of fossil fuel production—including pollution costs—are not accounted for under the U.S. Department of the Interior’s (Interior) coal, oil, and natural gas leasing programs. This results in fossil fuel production on public lands imposing significant social costs. Interior’s leasing programs have never been tailored to meet any past or present climate change goals, despite their significant contribution to domestic greenhouse gas emissions.
Idaho Conservation League v. Wheeler
The D.C. Circuit upheld EPA's decision not to issue financial responsibility requirements for the hard-rock mining industry. Environmental groups argued the decision violated CERCLA by wrongly interpreting the term "risk" in the operative provisions as limited to the risk of taxpayer-funded response...