Skip navigation.

Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, and the city of Boulder, Colorado are suing two U.S. government agencies for providing financial assistance to oil and other fossil fuel projects without first evaluating the projects' global warming impacts on the United States.

The suit was filed against two U.S. government agencies – the Export Import Bank (Ex-Im) and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). Ex-Im and OPIC are taxpayer funded agencies that provide financing and loans to U.S. corporations for overseas projects that commercial banks deem too risky.

Update: February 6, 2009 — A federal lawsuit that sought to force two U.S. agencies to address the global warming implications of their overseas financing activities was settled today after more than six years; the suit established important legal precedents related to global warming.

Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, and the city of Boulder, Colorado filed the suit in August 2002 and were later joined by the California cities of Arcata, Santa Monica and Oakland. The Plaintiffs alleged that the Export-Import Bank of the United States (ExIm)and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) illegally provided more than $32 billion in financing and insurance to fossil fuel projects over 10 years without assessing whether the projects contributed to global warming or impacted the U.S. environment, as they were required to do under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). By 2003, the fossil fuel projects financed by the two agencies from 1990 to 2003 accounted for nearly eight percent of the world's carbon dioxide emissions, or nearly one third of total U.S. emissions.

In August 2005, a federal judge found that the Plaintiffs suffering economic and other damages from climate change had standing to sue under NEPA, opening up the courthouse doors for the first time to those injured by climate change. Testimony from the case, which successfully asserted that climate change is real and caused by human activities, later informed the Mass. v EPA decision, in which the Supreme Court held that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are pollutants that can be regulated under the Clean Air Act.

Under the settlement agreed to today, the Export-Import Bank will begin taking carbon dioxide emissions into account in evaluating fossil fuel projects and create an organization-wide carbon policy. The Overseas Private Investment Corporation will establish a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated with projects by 20 percent over the next ten years. Both agencies will commit to increasing financing for renewable energy.

The settlement represents an important victory in the continuing campaign to hold both agencies accountable for their contributions to climate change.

Legal Documents

Court Order Denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment and Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment

June 06, 2007

Although Judge White refused to dismiss the case as requested by the Defendants, he held that a trial was necessary to determine whether the agencies' fossil fuel financial assistance projects constituted a major federal action, which would trigger NEPA environmental evaluations.

Download PDF (148 Kb)

Court Order Denying Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment

August 23, 2005

In this Order, Judge White ruled against the Defendants and decided that the Plaintiffs' case would not be dismissed because the Plaintiffs had legal standing based on their injuries from climate change: "projects supported by OPIC and ExIm are directly or indirectly responsible for approximately 1,911 million tons of carbon dioxide and methane emissions annually, which equals nearly eight percent of the world’s emissions and is equivalent to one third of the total carbon emissions from the United States in 2003.” This was the the first time that a federal court granted legal standing for injuries from global warming.

Download PDF (167 Kb)

Declaration of Dr. David Legates

February 11, 2005

Dr Legates' rebuttal to Dr. MacCracken's declaration. Legates is a known climate skeptic who has been associated with several right wing institutions paid by ExxonMobil. For more on Legates' right-wing connections, see our research on exxonsecrets.org (Hit SKIP INTRO at bottom right to go straight to the diagram.)

Download PDF (2 Mb)

Declaration of Richard Heede

February 11, 2005

Declaration of Climate Mitigation Services "summarizes the results and the methodology used to estimate the direct, indirect and cumulative greenhouse gas emissions of projects financed by Ex-Im and OPIC from 1990 through 2003. Heede concludes that the massive oil, natural gas and coal energy projects these banks finance now financed account for nearly eight percent of the world's emissions of carbon dioxide or nearly one third of the total U.S. carbon emissions in 2003.

Download PDF (666 Kb)

Complaint for Declaratory & Injunctive Relief (Second Amended)

December 22, 2004

Plaintiffs' Complaint against the government that states the basis for the lawsuit, the harm inflicted on plaintiffs due to climate change, and the request for relief.

Download PDF (266 Kb)

Declaration of Dr. Michael C. MacCracken

December 22, 2004

Declration on the scientific consensus on global warming. Dr MacCracken served as the first Executive Director of the Office of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) under the Clinton Administration from 1993-1997. There he was responsible for assisting the coordination of global warming research programs of ten federal agencies, including the Department of Energy, the National Science Foundation, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, EPA, NASA and others.

Download PDF (321 Kb)

Background Briefing on Climate Litigation

December 16, 2004

This document provides more information on 10 legal actions that have been announced around the world under several different legal theories in order to combat climate change. The 10 actions have been grouped together by legal category.

Download PDF (24 Kb)

Government's Motion for Summary Judgement

November 03, 2004

Government's November 2004 reponse to the lawsuit wherein the government claims the lawsuit is invalid because human emissions of greenhouse gases - burning coal, oil and natural gas in powerplants and transportation - have not been proven to cause global warming.

Download PDF (238 Kb)
Learn more
Global warming
Oceans
Forests
Nuclear
Toxics
Staff blog
Media center
Press contacts
News releases
Bloggers Center
Experts
Photos
Videos
Get involved
Take action
Jobs
Greenpeace Organizing Term
Greenpeace Student Network
Donate
Renew your membership

Greenpeace Fund
Make a tax-deductible donation
Gift and estate planning

702 H Street, NW, Suite 300, Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 462-1177