The Supreme Court has agreed to consider reviving approval for a railway project in rural eastern Utah that would transport crude oil and boost fossil fuel production. The Uinta Basin Railway, an 88-mile railroad line, would connect oil and gas producers in rural Utah to larger markets and refineries near the Gulf of Mexico. The project is a public-private partnership between infrastructure firm DHIP Group and the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition, with support from oil businesses and the Ute Indian Tribe. Proponents argue that the railway would benefit the local economy and increase domestic energy production.
The type of oil to be transported from Utah, waxy crude, presents challenges due to its semi-solid state at room temperature. Currently, the oil is shipped in heated tankers, but proponents of the railway project argue that its consistency makes it less damaging and easier to clean up in the event of spills. The Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case has brought optimism to the developers of the railway, who see the project as crucial for the economic growth and connectivity of the Uinta Basin region. However, environmental groups and officials in Colorado have raised concerns about safety, potential train derailments, and the environmental impact of increased oil extraction and burning.
Environmental groups, along with Colorado officials, have sued to challenge the project, citing concerns about safety, potential oil spills, and climate change. The federal appeals court in Washington previously ruled that the Surface Transportation Board’s environmental approval was rushed and violated federal law. The Supreme Court will now consider whether the agency should have assessed the potential environmental harm of the railway’s main cargo, despite lacking regulatory authority over oil production. Despite the legal battle, the railroad would still require additional reviews and government approvals to proceed.
Opponents of the project, including Colorado U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet and U.S. Rep Joe Neguse, argue that an oil spill in the Colorado River headwaters could have catastrophic consequences. They fear that the railway would allow for more oil extraction and consumption, further contributing to climate change. Environmental groups, such as the Center for Biological Diversity, have expressed disappointment in the Supreme Court’s decision to take up the case and maintain that the appellate court’s ruling against the project was legally sound. The outcome of the Supreme Court case will have implications for the future of the Uinta Basin Railway and its potential impact on the environment and local communities.
