Harriet Hageman Accuses Environmental Groups Of Using NEPA 'As A Weapon' To Stall Energy Projects

Forbes Breaking News

During a House Natural Resources Committee hearing prior to the congressional recess, Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-WY) spoke about the effect of NEPA on the permitting time for hydrocarbon projects.

Transcript

00:00Now recognizes herself for five minutes of questioning. I think it's great that

00:04we're talking about potential solutions but you cannot look to solutions unless

00:08you're willing to admit what is the problem. And Mr. Mergan, listening to you

00:13today talk about NEPA, you live on a different planet than I have for the

00:17last 25 years in terms of practicing law and fighting against radical

00:21environmental groups as they have weaponized NEPA to stop every project

00:24and stop the ability to access and produce affordable and reliable energy.

00:29Mr. Campbell, you have several times referenced the desperate need for

00:34reliable and affordable energy and the ranking member just threw a tantrum

00:38attacking the administration for its wind and solar policies but everybody in this

00:44room knows that wind and solar are not affordable and they are not reliable. We

00:49have got to focus on the things that work. In Wyoming, we are the largest coal

00:54producer in the nation. But we also often say that federal coal is actually subject

01:01to triple jeopardy when it comes to NEPA. In other words, there's three different

01:07times that they that any one of our projects has to go through NEPA three

01:11separate times. That is because the Office of Surface Mining recently made a

01:16policy decision disconnected from any statutory requirement requiring federal

01:22mine plans to also be subject to NEPA three layers of the federal coal permitting

01:27process are now subject to NEPA review in Wyoming. So Mr. Hergott, are there other

01:34project areas that you are aware of that are subject to multiple rounds of NEPA?

01:41I mean, if you could rephrase the question, I mean, I think what you're saying is, is, is the

01:50redundancy of the additional work that's being required that's not that's not in

01:54current law. That's correct. Yes. I mean, the mission creep on that courts are

01:59improvising and and agencies are defaulting and fear and in that absence in that

02:03vacuum project developers are left out on a limb with no one to back them. And the

02:08certainty and stability is absolutely critically important for these large

02:12multi-billion projects to go forward, isn't it? If we stay on this current path,

02:17I'm not sure who's going to invest in any projects in this country. In fact, I would

02:21tell them not to. There is no predictable path to an ROI and right now it's seven to

02:25eight years from the concept to just getting to a place where you're at the

02:29end of NEPA and then you still need to build the darn thing. That's a 10 year

02:32window. That's that's four midterms and two presidential elections based on the

02:37abandonment rate of what's happening now with cases that are still winning in

02:40Supreme Court. But the project is already abandoned like Atlanta Coast and Penn

02:43East. There is no reason why you would put $500 million a billion dollars behind

02:48any project in this country without a regulatory path and the way in the way

02:51in which NEPA has been co-opted to be a proxy fight against an energy source that

02:55people don't like because they didn't win an election. So, Mr. Campbell, what does that

02:59do to our ability to produce reliable and affordable energy to meet the demands in

03:03this country? So, I think we need changes and fossil fuel is not the enemy that

03:09everybody wants to make it out to. We have to have that. That's the all always

03:13available generation. I think we need renewables and we need lots of nuclear in

03:18this country too. But we have to we have to somehow get through the red tape to

03:24where we can start to build. And right now because of the way that NEPA has been

03:27interpreted the way that the environmental groups have used it as a weapon to stop

03:31these projects, that's an impossibility. Is that correct? I think on both sides

03:36whoever's trying to do it can manipulate the system. Well, and you shouldn't. But we

03:41know how the system is being manipulated. We don't have to both sides this. The

03:45reality is that there has been a war on coal, a war on pipelines, a war on oil and

03:49gas for a couple of decades now. There has that that is just the reality and as a

03:54result we're in the situation that we're in right now, aren't we? I don't disagree with

03:57that. Mr. Bowles, what do you think about that? How do we go forward with

04:01these projects that we desperately need if we have NEPA in the current condition

04:04that it's in? With a concise defined process I think is the only way to

04:11proceed in a process that's fair to all. So we need permitting reform. We need to

04:18reform the way that NEPA is interpreted and applied. That is Congress's

04:24responsibility. Wouldn't you agree? If if NEPA is the process I think you need to dig

04:30deeper and look at the individual permits could be part of the the problem of a

04:34challenge. But if NEPA is the process I think just just outlining the process

04:39would be a great place to start. Okay. I appreciate that. With that I yield back.

04:44Yes. Madam Chair, may I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record this June

04:492025 report by Ember Energy showing that prices on battery storage have fallen so

04:54significantly that solar and battery storage can now provide affordable, reliable,

04:5724-7 energy even when the sun goes down. According to the report the average

05:02global cost of these solar storage systems is a hundred and four dollars per

05:05megawatt hour. More affordable than new coal plants which is which costs 118. Without

05:10is without objection so ordered. Thank you Madam Chair.

Category

Transcript

Recommended