{"id":4374,"date":"2016-07-27T13:17:02","date_gmt":"2016-07-27T18:17:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/?p=4374"},"modified":"2016-07-27T13:17:02","modified_gmt":"2016-07-27T18:17:02","slug":"upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/","title":{"rendered":"Upstream and Downstream Emissions: Understanding the D.C. Circuit Decisions Upholding FERC\u2019s Environmental Analysis for LNG Export Terminals"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

\"lng-terminal-ship\"<\/a>By Michael Burger and Jessica Wentz<\/strong><\/p>\n

Last month, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued two decisions upholding the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)\u2019s environmental impact analysis for liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals in Louisiana (No. 14-1249<\/a>) and Texas (No. 14-1275<\/a>). In both cases, the court rejected claims that FERC should have considered upstream and downstream greenhouse gas emissions as part of their NEPA review. In particular, the court opined that FERC does not have to analyze the extent to which natural gas exports would induce additional natural gas production and the effects of induced production on greenhouse gas emissions as indirect effects of the LNG terminal approvals.<\/p>\n

In a thoughtful assessment of the decisions, one group of commentators<\/a> has suggested that these decisions may make it more difficult for the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and other courts to demand that federal agencies consider upstream and downstream impacts in environmental reviews for fossil fuel-related approvals. But we think this overstates the reach of the D.C. Circuit decisions, both of which were based on the unique set of circumstances surrounding the approval of LNG exports, and that a full accounting of the climate impacts of these and other export projects should still be forthcoming.<\/p>\n

Decisions regarding the export of natural gas from the United States are split between two agencies: FERC and the Department of Energy (DOE). While FERC has jurisdiction over the siting, construction, and operation of LNG export terminals, it is DOE that has the sole authority to license the export of any natural gas from those terminals, based on its determination of whether such exports would serve the public interest. Consistent with this division of responsibilities, the court held that FERC\u2019s NEPA analysis did not have to address the indirect effects of the anticipated export of natural gas. The court explained:<\/p>\n

The Department\u2019s independent decision to allow exports\u2014a decision over which the Commission has no regulatory authority\u2014breaks the NEPA causal chain and absolves the Commission of responsibility to include in its NEPA analysis considerations that it \u201ccould not act on\u201d and for which it cannot be \u201cthe legally relevant cause.\u201d (No. 14-1275, p. 18.)<\/em><\/p>\n

The court cited Public Citizen v. Dept. of Transportation, <\/em>541 U.S. 752 (2004) as the primary basis for its decision. There, the Supreme Court held that an agency need not consider environmental effects in its NEPA review when it has \u201cno ability\u201d to adopt a course of action that could prevent or otherwise influence those effects. 541 U.S. at 766.<\/p>\n

Importantly, the DC Circuit made clear that it was expressing no opinion on whether FERC\u2019s environmental analysis would have been adequate to satisfy DOE\u2019s independent NEPA obligation in authorizing the export of natural gas, even suggesting that DOE would be the appropriate agency to conduct an upstream\/downstream analysis of LNG exports, if such an analysis is required. The DOE\u2019s compliance with NEPA in the context of LNG facilities is the subject of two other lawsuits, one challenging DOE\u2019s order authorizing the LNG exports at issue in these cases (Sierra Club v. DOE, No. 15-1489), and another challenging the DOE export approval for another such facility in Maryland (Sierra Club v. DOE, No. 16-1186).<\/p>\n

In short, the D.C. Circuit will not be settling questions regarding the scope of the indirect impact analysis for LNG exports until it issues its opinions in the cases involving DOE\u2019s export authorizations (which will probably be decided this fall or in early 2017).<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Because of the unique context of these cases, we do not think they establish any clear precedent for other fossil fuel-related approvals, such as pipeline approvals and leasing decisions. \u00a0These types of approvals can directly affect patterns of fossil fuel production and consumption (and corresponding emissions), and the reviewing agencies can act on information about these effects when deciding whether and how to proceed with the proposed action. Requiring an upstream and downstream emissions analysis for such decisions is therefore consistent with Public Citizen v. Dept. of Transportation <\/em>and the NEPA regulations.<\/p>\n

There are two federal appellate decisions that support this idea \u2013 Mid States Coalition for Progress v. Surface Transportation Board<\/em>, 345 F.3d 520 (8th<\/sup> Cir. 2003) (requiring analysis of downstream emissions from coal consumption in EIS for a coal railroad line) and Northern Plains Council v. Surface Transportation Board<\/em>, 668 F.3d 1067 (9th<\/sup> Cir. 2011) (requiring analysis of upstream emissions from coal production in EIS for a coal railroad line). The D.C. Circuit did not discuss the latter case in either of its decisions \u2013 but it did clarify that it was declining to apply the Mid States<\/em> case only because the petitioners \u201chad not identified any\u2026 indirect consequences\u2026 that exist apart from the intervening [DOE] decision to authorize exports.\u201d (No. 14-1275, p. 18.) The D.C. Circuit made no statement regarding the validity of the Mid States<\/em> case or its application to other types of fossil fuel-related approvals.<\/p>\n

So what might we expect from the DOE cases? \u00a0Decisions favoring analysis and disclosure would be consistent with NEPA, and with CEQ\u2019s revised draft guidance on analyzing climate change under the statute, but it is of course hard to predict the outcomes. However, we can say this: what matters for the purposes of satisfying NEPA is that the federal government conducts a meaningful analysis of the environmental impacts from LNG exports at some point in the decision-making chain, when it can meaningfully influence agencies\u2019 choices. This analysis should address the effect of LNG exports on natural gas production and end-use energy consumption and the greenhouse gas emissions that will be generated from the induced changes in production and consumption \u2013 a goal being to better understand how the authorization of LNG exports affects our ability to meet our national and international climate targets.\u00a0 While such considerations may fall beyond the scope of FERC\u2019s jurisdiction, they are squarely within DOE\u2019s, and they are clearly relevant to DOE\u2019s determination as to whether LNG exports are in the public interest. A decision holding DOE to the task would be the best way to ensure that the agency and the public are fully informed about the climate consequences of increasing LNG exports.<\/p>\n

For a more on this topic, see: Michael Burger and Jessica Wentz, Downstream and Upstream Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The Proper Scope of NEPA Review<\/a> (forthcoming in Vol. 41 of the Harvard Environmental Law Review).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Michael Burger and Jessica Wentz Last month, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued two decisions upholding the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)\u2019s environmental impact analysis for liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals in Louisiana (No. 14-1249) and Texas (No. 14-1275). In both cases, the court rejected claims that FERC should have considered upstream and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1403,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-4374","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-uncategorized","7":"czr-hentry"},"yoast_head":"\nUpstream and Downstream Emissions: Understanding the D.C. Circuit Decisions Upholding FERC\u2019s Environmental Analysis for LNG Export Terminals - Climate Law Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Upstream and Downstream Emissions: Understanding the D.C. Circuit Decisions Upholding FERC\u2019s Environmental Analysis for LNG Export Terminals - Climate Law Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"By Michael Burger and Jessica Wentz Last month, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued two decisions upholding the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)\u2019s environmental impact analysis for liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals in Louisiana (No. 14-1249) and Texas (No. 14-1275). In both cases, the court rejected claims that FERC should have considered upstream and […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Climate Law Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2016-07-27T18:17:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2016\/07\/lng-terminal-ship-300x250.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jessica Wentz\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@sabincenter\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@sabincenter\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Jessica Wentz\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/27\\\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/27\\\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Jessica Wentz\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/32e3a0482a78fd977239941012823bd4\"},\"headline\":\"Upstream and Downstream Emissions: Understanding the D.C. Circuit Decisions Upholding FERC\u2019s Environmental Analysis for LNG Export Terminals\",\"datePublished\":\"2016-07-27T18:17:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/27\\\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1081,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/27\\\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/files\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/lng-terminal-ship-300x250.jpg\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/27\\\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/27\\\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\\\/\",\"name\":\"Upstream and Downstream Emissions: Understanding the D.C. Circuit Decisions Upholding FERC\u2019s Environmental Analysis for LNG Export Terminals - Climate Law Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/27\\\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/27\\\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/files\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/lng-terminal-ship-300x250.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2016-07-27T18:17:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/27\\\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/27\\\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/27\\\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/files\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/lng-terminal-ship.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/files\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/lng-terminal-ship.jpg\",\"width\":600,\"height\":500},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2016\\\/07\\\/27\\\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Upstream and Downstream Emissions: Understanding the D.C. Circuit Decisions Upholding FERC\u2019s Environmental Analysis for LNG Export Terminals\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/\",\"name\":\"Climate Law Blog\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/files\\\/2023\\\/02\\\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/files\\\/2023\\\/02\\\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png\",\"width\":2752,\"height\":260,\"caption\":\"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/sabincenter\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/32e3a0482a78fd977239941012823bd4\",\"name\":\"Jessica Wentz\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/author\\\/jwentz\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Upstream and Downstream Emissions: Understanding the D.C. Circuit Decisions Upholding FERC\u2019s Environmental Analysis for LNG Export Terminals - Climate Law Blog","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Upstream and Downstream Emissions: Understanding the D.C. Circuit Decisions Upholding FERC\u2019s Environmental Analysis for LNG Export Terminals - Climate Law Blog","og_description":"By Michael Burger and Jessica Wentz Last month, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued two decisions upholding the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)\u2019s environmental impact analysis for liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals in Louisiana (No. 14-1249) and Texas (No. 14-1275). In both cases, the court rejected claims that FERC should have considered upstream and […]","og_url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/","og_site_name":"Climate Law Blog","article_published_time":"2016-07-27T18:17:02+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2016\/07\/lng-terminal-ship-300x250.jpg","type":"","width":"","height":""}],"author":"Jessica Wentz","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@sabincenter","twitter_site":"@sabincenter","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Jessica Wentz","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/"},"author":{"name":"Jessica Wentz","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/person\/32e3a0482a78fd977239941012823bd4"},"headline":"Upstream and Downstream Emissions: Understanding the D.C. Circuit Decisions Upholding FERC\u2019s Environmental Analysis for LNG Export Terminals","datePublished":"2016-07-27T18:17:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/"},"wordCount":1081,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2016\/07\/lng-terminal-ship-300x250.jpg","inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/","name":"Upstream and Downstream Emissions: Understanding the D.C. Circuit Decisions Upholding FERC\u2019s Environmental Analysis for LNG Export Terminals - Climate Law Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2016\/07\/lng-terminal-ship-300x250.jpg","datePublished":"2016-07-27T18:17:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2016\/07\/lng-terminal-ship.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2016\/07\/lng-terminal-ship.jpg","width":600,"height":500},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/07\/27\/upstream-and-downstream-emissions-understanding-the-d-c-circuit-decisions-upholding-fercs-environmental-analysis-for-lng-export-terminals\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Upstream and Downstream Emissions: Understanding the D.C. Circuit Decisions Upholding FERC\u2019s Environmental Analysis for LNG Export Terminals"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/","name":"Climate Law Blog","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization","name":"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2023\/02\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2023\/02\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png","width":2752,"height":260,"caption":"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/x.com\/sabincenter"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/person\/32e3a0482a78fd977239941012823bd4","name":"Jessica Wentz","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/author\/jwentz\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4374","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1403"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4374"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4374\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4374"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4374"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4374"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}