Inola aluminium smelter faces new test over DOE funding, environmental review

Construction of the first US aluminium smelter since 1980 at the Tulsa Port of Inola is faced with another test. Four nearby residents have filed a lawsuit, claiming that the US Department of Energy (DOE) was funding the project without undertaking the site-specific environmental review. This adds a fresh layer of scrutiny to the Trump-backed aluminium smelter that was being pushed to boost the domestic aluminium industry.

The proposed aluminium facility under the lens, with a 60-40 joint venture of Emirates Global Aluminium (EGA) and Century Aluminum, respectively, is being developed by Oklahoma Primary Aluminum, with a projected annual production capacity of more than 750,000 tonnes of aluminium.

Join the webinar by Alberto Monje Gama to learn about recycled aluminium, CBAM and trust

After Inola City Council-approved a 60-day moratorium and Oklahoma Attorney General and governor candidate Gentner Drummond’s lawsuit seeking to stop the project, the local opposition has emerged once more.

The latest lawsuit, filed in the Northern District of Oklahoma, names Energy Secretary Chris Wright and the DOE as defendants. The four Rogers County residents are seeking a preliminary pause on further federal funding for major, irreversible construction such as land clearing, grading, foundations, permanent roads and utilities, until a comprehensive environmental review of the Inola site is completed.

At the centre of the case is the claim that the agency improperly used a process known in environmental law as “segmentation” by treating connected stages of the project as separate actions.

The filing states that “Phase 1 and construction of the smelter were connected parts of one proposed action,” arguing that site selection, design, equipment procurement and infrastructure work were ultimately linked to advancing the larger construction project.

To explore trade opportunities of secondary aluminium, visit AL Biz

A scrutiny founded on environmental concerns

The plaintiffs have raised concerns about the potential effects of the proposed smelter on air quality, water resources, traffic, noise, wildlife and nearby agricultural operations. They also cite possible impacts on property values and surrounding hay and cattle businesses.

One of the more significant claims in the lawsuit concerns potential hydrogen fluoride emissions. Citing an outside expert analysis, the plaintiffs allege that emissions under realistic operating conditions could exceed 1,000 tonnes annually.

The situation has been compared with Magnitude 7 Metals planned restart of its Marston, Missouri, primary aluminium smelter, which, according to the filing, represents the highest annual emissions among existing US aluminium plants at 131 tonnes per year.

These figures remain claims made in the lawsuit, rather than established findings.

The filing also states that the DOE continued supporting site-specific engineering, permitting and early planning work at Inola without first completing the environmental review the plaintiffs believe is required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Administrative Procedure Act.

Showcase your brand, aluminium recycling initiatives and sustainability vision in our upcoming magazine: Sustainability & Recycling: Aluminium’s Commitment 2026. 

USD 4 billion project backed by federal and state officials

Federal involvement dates back to 2024, when the DOE selected Century Aluminum for negotiations over potential federal support. In January 2025, the DOE and Century entered into a cooperative agreement providing for a potential federal cost share of up to USD 500 million.

Oklahoma officials have also cited more than USD 750 million in state and local subsidies connected to the project.

The smelter has received backing from both state and federal leadership as part of efforts to expand domestic manufacturing and strengthen US aluminium production. It is an echo of the Section 232 tariffs being pushed by President Donald Trump to promote domestic growth and expansion of the US aluminium industry.

The lawsuit comes as the project moves towards a possible groundbreaking later this year. No hearing date had been set at the time of the filing.

The latest lawsuit might add uncertainty to the project’s timeline if the court requires additional review before later construction activities or federal funding can proceed.