Young activists who won Montana climate case want to stop power plant on Yellowstone River
HELENA, Mont. — Fresh off a legal victory earlier this year in a landmark climate change case, a group of young environmental activists are trying to convince the Montana Supreme Court to stop a natural gas power plant being built on the banks of the Yellowstone River.
The 16 activists said in a brief filed with the court on Tuesday that the air quality permit for the plant near Laurel in south-central Montana should be invalidated or at least suspended until a ruling on the state’s appeal in their climate change case. The assignment was in support of two environmental groups that were challenging the permit.
The activists prevailed in August in their yearlong lawsuit against the state for not doing enough to protect them from climate change. They claimed that severe wildfires, floods, droughts and other problems caused by global warming violated their right to a clean and healthy environment under the state constitution.
A state policy, which the judge in the case declared unconstitutional, did not require officials to consider the effect of greenhouse gas emissions when approving fossil fuel projects.
The ruling in the first trial of its kind in the US has contributed to a small number of legal decisions around the world that have established the government’s duty to protect citizens from climate change.
In the letter, their attorneys said the young activists have “a unique and significant interest” in ensuring that new fossil fuel projects like the power plant do not proceed “given the significant harm resulting from additional (greenhouse gas) pollution in Montana.”
The state has appealed the August climate ruling to the Montana Supreme Court, but has not presented its arguments in the case.
The young plaintiffs said the judges should not wait until their case is resolved before taking action against the power plant permit. Their lawyer also asked that any constitutional climate and environmental issues be addressed through the climate lawsuit, which was heard at trial, and not through the power plant permit case.
The plant is being built to provide energy during times of high demand when open market prices are high, NorthWestern Energy said. The company did not oppose the activists’ lawyers filing a brief in the case.
“We respect the positions of others, but it is NorthWestern Energy’s obligation to provide reliable energy services at the most affordable rates for our customers in Montana,” spokesperson Jo Dee Black said in a statement. “Reliable energy service, especially during winter, is critical to our customers’ lives.”
Judge Michael Moses in Billings ruled in April that the Montana Department of Environmental Quality illegally granted the Yellowstone County Generating Station permit in 2021 because it failed to consider the effects of greenhouse gas emissions. In response, the state Legislature updated the Montana Environmental Policy Act to say the agency did not have to consider greenhouse gas emissions unless the federal government started regulating those emissions.
In June, Moses withdrew his order that invalidated the air quality permit, partly in response to the new legislation. Construction of the $250 million power plant resumed.
Roger Sullivan, one of the lawyers for the young plaintiffs, said the court’s August ruling was binding on the Montana Department of Environmental Quality and other agencies when considering fossil fuel permits.
“We are hopeful that the Court will find our amicus brief helpful,” Sullivan said.