SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Activists protest against fracked gas exports on June 15, 2022 in New York City.
One campaigner from Public Citizen—which sued to block Nopetro's project—called it "a real testament to the incredible organizing by the people of Port St. Joe."
Climate and environment defenders this week welcomed the cancellation of a controversial facility in the Florida Panhandle that would have exported up to nearly 4 billion cubic feet of planet-heating liquefied natural gas per year.
Miami-based Nopetro announced Monday that the company would scrap plans to build a 60-acre liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal on the grounds of a shuttered paper mill in a historically Black neighborhood of Port St. Joe in Gulf County.
While Nopetro said the decision was made last year "purely due to market conditions," the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen noted the role that years of community activism and the group's own lawsuit may have played in the project's cancellation.
"I think it's a real testament to the incredible organizing by the people of Port St. Joe," Public Citizen Energy Program director Tyson Slocum told WMBB. "Once they started to learn about what had been negotiated behind closed doors, they rose up in very clear opposition to building an LNG export terminal."
"Nopetro wanted to cut corners, and rush the project past the community with little to no notice," Slocum said in a separate statement. "Public Citizen has been privileged to work with so many dozens of incredible Port St. Joe residents who courageously took a stand for their community."
While proponents argue that LNG is among the safest fossil fuels to produce and transport, critics note the numerous explosions and fires at gas facilities in recent years, as well as the worsening planetary climate emergency caused and exacerbated by fossil fuel extraction and use.
Public Citizen's lawsuit—which the group is continuing—seeks to determine whether Nopetro's proposed project fell under the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) jurisdiction under the Natural Gas Act. If the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. says it does, then Nopetro would not be able to build the facility until FERC completes an environmental impact review.
Critics claim Nopetro intentionally designed the project to dodge FERC oversight.
Slocum explained why Public Citizen will continue its litigation even though the project was canceled.
"The lawsuit is bigger than just Port St. Joe," he told The Star. "It's about closing this loophole so that other communities aren't exposed to the ability of an LNG export terminal to build the facility without FERC oversight."
Dannie Bolden, one of the community leaders opposed to the terminal, said that while he "was relieved to hear Nopetro decided not to pursue the construction," opponents "must remain steadfast to ensure there [are] no LNG facility constructed along Florida's Panhandle."
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Climate and environment defenders this week welcomed the cancellation of a controversial facility in the Florida Panhandle that would have exported up to nearly 4 billion cubic feet of planet-heating liquefied natural gas per year.
Miami-based Nopetro announced Monday that the company would scrap plans to build a 60-acre liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal on the grounds of a shuttered paper mill in a historically Black neighborhood of Port St. Joe in Gulf County.
While Nopetro said the decision was made last year "purely due to market conditions," the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen noted the role that years of community activism and the group's own lawsuit may have played in the project's cancellation.
"I think it's a real testament to the incredible organizing by the people of Port St. Joe," Public Citizen Energy Program director Tyson Slocum told WMBB. "Once they started to learn about what had been negotiated behind closed doors, they rose up in very clear opposition to building an LNG export terminal."
"Nopetro wanted to cut corners, and rush the project past the community with little to no notice," Slocum said in a separate statement. "Public Citizen has been privileged to work with so many dozens of incredible Port St. Joe residents who courageously took a stand for their community."
While proponents argue that LNG is among the safest fossil fuels to produce and transport, critics note the numerous explosions and fires at gas facilities in recent years, as well as the worsening planetary climate emergency caused and exacerbated by fossil fuel extraction and use.
Public Citizen's lawsuit—which the group is continuing—seeks to determine whether Nopetro's proposed project fell under the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) jurisdiction under the Natural Gas Act. If the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. says it does, then Nopetro would not be able to build the facility until FERC completes an environmental impact review.
Critics claim Nopetro intentionally designed the project to dodge FERC oversight.
Slocum explained why Public Citizen will continue its litigation even though the project was canceled.
"The lawsuit is bigger than just Port St. Joe," he told The Star. "It's about closing this loophole so that other communities aren't exposed to the ability of an LNG export terminal to build the facility without FERC oversight."
Dannie Bolden, one of the community leaders opposed to the terminal, said that while he "was relieved to hear Nopetro decided not to pursue the construction," opponents "must remain steadfast to ensure there [are] no LNG facility constructed along Florida's Panhandle."
Climate and environment defenders this week welcomed the cancellation of a controversial facility in the Florida Panhandle that would have exported up to nearly 4 billion cubic feet of planet-heating liquefied natural gas per year.
Miami-based Nopetro announced Monday that the company would scrap plans to build a 60-acre liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal on the grounds of a shuttered paper mill in a historically Black neighborhood of Port St. Joe in Gulf County.
While Nopetro said the decision was made last year "purely due to market conditions," the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen noted the role that years of community activism and the group's own lawsuit may have played in the project's cancellation.
"I think it's a real testament to the incredible organizing by the people of Port St. Joe," Public Citizen Energy Program director Tyson Slocum told WMBB. "Once they started to learn about what had been negotiated behind closed doors, they rose up in very clear opposition to building an LNG export terminal."
"Nopetro wanted to cut corners, and rush the project past the community with little to no notice," Slocum said in a separate statement. "Public Citizen has been privileged to work with so many dozens of incredible Port St. Joe residents who courageously took a stand for their community."
While proponents argue that LNG is among the safest fossil fuels to produce and transport, critics note the numerous explosions and fires at gas facilities in recent years, as well as the worsening planetary climate emergency caused and exacerbated by fossil fuel extraction and use.
Public Citizen's lawsuit—which the group is continuing—seeks to determine whether Nopetro's proposed project fell under the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) jurisdiction under the Natural Gas Act. If the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. says it does, then Nopetro would not be able to build the facility until FERC completes an environmental impact review.
Critics claim Nopetro intentionally designed the project to dodge FERC oversight.
Slocum explained why Public Citizen will continue its litigation even though the project was canceled.
"The lawsuit is bigger than just Port St. Joe," he told The Star. "It's about closing this loophole so that other communities aren't exposed to the ability of an LNG export terminal to build the facility without FERC oversight."
Dannie Bolden, one of the community leaders opposed to the terminal, said that while he "was relieved to hear Nopetro decided not to pursue the construction," opponents "must remain steadfast to ensure there [are] no LNG facility constructed along Florida's Panhandle."