Kelcy Warren, founder of Energy Transfer, is poised to deliver a devastating financial blow to Greenpeace USA. Warren’s company has launched a lawsuit against Greenpeace alleging that the environmental group played a significant role in the protests against his Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) project, delaying its completion and causing substantial financial losses. The case, scheduled for trial in February in North Dakota, could potentially bankrupt Greenpeace's U.S. operations.
The confrontation traces back to 2016 when Greenpeace joined Native American groups and activists in North Dakota to oppose the nearly 1,200-mile pipeline. The protests, which attracted global media attention, delayed the project and highlighted the conflict between environmental activists and the energy industry.
Energy Transfer’s lawsuit seeks $300 million in damages. A ruling in favor of Warren could wipe out Greenpeace USA’s operations, which the group’s leadership describes as an "existential threat." Greenpeace argues that it played only a supporting role in the DAPL protests and never engaged in or encouraged violence.
Environmental advocates fear the case could set a dangerous precedent, chilling future activism.
Though the lawsuit targets Greenpeace’s U.S. affiliate, the international Greenpeace network is less vulnerable due to jurisdictional limitations. Still, losing its American presence would weaken the organization’s influence in the global climate fight.
CIPA is reviewing the ruling closely to explore whether it opens the possibility to push back on misinformation peddled by California-based activist groups, many who are funded by foreign dark money whose real goal is to make the state even more dependent on foreign imports. The state already imports 75% of the crude it consumes. Several initiatives, including SB 1137, the 3,200-foot setback, were based on false science and deliberate falsehoods about the safety of domestic operations. Numerous studies, including Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) conducted according to state law, were ignored by the state and legislators when adopting the arbitrary setback law.