

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.

A network of insulated pipes that carry liquid natural gas from ships to giant storage tanks is seen near Ensenada, Mexico on August 28, 2008.
The U.S. State Department, said Public Citizen, "abdicated its authority" when it approved the Saguaro LNG pipeline without securing an emissions review.
Days after U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken addressed the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference and warned that food insecurity "is made worse by our warming climate," government watchdog Public Citizen wrote to the top diplomat Wednesday, demanding to know why—if he is concerned about planetary heating—his agency recently approved the construction of a fracked gas pipeline.
The group was particularly perplexed by the fact that the State Department approved Oneok's Saguaro pipeline even though two weeks earlier, the Bureau of Energy Resources had ignored a request for a federally mandated emissions review for the project.
"Today Public Citizen requests that the U.S. Department of State explain why it abdicated its authority to grant a favorable recommendation for a natural gas export pipeline without first obtaining a lifecycle analysis of the project's impact on greenhouse gas emissions," wrote Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's energy program. "We request a meeting with the appropriate representative to discuss."
Oneok wrote to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in December 2022, requesting a presidential permit to build and operate the proposed 155-mile pipeline, which would connect the Permian Basin in West Texas to liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals in Mexico.
"Why did the government backtrack on a modest demand for a greenhouse gas emissions analysis for a pipeline and instead rubber-stamp a major fossil fuel project?"
FERC is required to obtain a "favorable recommendation" from the State Department before granting a permit for the construction of a pipeline that would cross a U.S. border.
But in an executive action announced in September, President Joe Biden directed agencies to consider the greenhouse gas impacts of new projects, "in environmental reviews conducted pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)."
As such, Public Citizen noted in its letter, Hagen Maroney, deputy director of the State Department's Office of Global Change wrote to FERC on November 8 requesting "a greenhouse gas emissions analysis for the Saguaro pipeline project that covers lifecycle upstream and downstream greenhouse gas emissions."
Both FERC and Oneok refused to cooperate with the request, saying it was "beyond the scope" of the agency's analysis—but nevertheless, on November 13, the company and the commission were granted a favorable recommendation for the presidential permit.
As Reuters reported in June, U.S. companies were on track to approve three LNG export projects capable of processing 5.1 billion cubic feet per day (bcfd)—a record annual volume for LNG projects.
The U.S. became the largest producer of LNG in 2022, with exports expected to reach 12.1 bcfd this year and 12.7 bcfd in 2024.
"The Biden administration must explain why it is allowing a major fossil fuel export pipeline to be built, at the very moment it is traveling to global climate talks to call for ambitious climate action," said Slocum. "Why did the government backtrack on a modest demand for a greenhouse gas emissions analysis for a pipeline and instead rubber-stamp a major fossil fuel project?"
"The green light for the Saguaro pipeline project," he added, "shows yet again that the Biden administration's support for unfettered fossil fuel exports compromises its position to address the climate crisis."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. 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. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Days after U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken addressed the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference and warned that food insecurity "is made worse by our warming climate," government watchdog Public Citizen wrote to the top diplomat Wednesday, demanding to know why—if he is concerned about planetary heating—his agency recently approved the construction of a fracked gas pipeline.
The group was particularly perplexed by the fact that the State Department approved Oneok's Saguaro pipeline even though two weeks earlier, the Bureau of Energy Resources had ignored a request for a federally mandated emissions review for the project.
"Today Public Citizen requests that the U.S. Department of State explain why it abdicated its authority to grant a favorable recommendation for a natural gas export pipeline without first obtaining a lifecycle analysis of the project's impact on greenhouse gas emissions," wrote Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's energy program. "We request a meeting with the appropriate representative to discuss."
Oneok wrote to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in December 2022, requesting a presidential permit to build and operate the proposed 155-mile pipeline, which would connect the Permian Basin in West Texas to liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals in Mexico.
"Why did the government backtrack on a modest demand for a greenhouse gas emissions analysis for a pipeline and instead rubber-stamp a major fossil fuel project?"
FERC is required to obtain a "favorable recommendation" from the State Department before granting a permit for the construction of a pipeline that would cross a U.S. border.
But in an executive action announced in September, President Joe Biden directed agencies to consider the greenhouse gas impacts of new projects, "in environmental reviews conducted pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)."
As such, Public Citizen noted in its letter, Hagen Maroney, deputy director of the State Department's Office of Global Change wrote to FERC on November 8 requesting "a greenhouse gas emissions analysis for the Saguaro pipeline project that covers lifecycle upstream and downstream greenhouse gas emissions."
Both FERC and Oneok refused to cooperate with the request, saying it was "beyond the scope" of the agency's analysis—but nevertheless, on November 13, the company and the commission were granted a favorable recommendation for the presidential permit.
As Reuters reported in June, U.S. companies were on track to approve three LNG export projects capable of processing 5.1 billion cubic feet per day (bcfd)—a record annual volume for LNG projects.
The U.S. became the largest producer of LNG in 2022, with exports expected to reach 12.1 bcfd this year and 12.7 bcfd in 2024.
"The Biden administration must explain why it is allowing a major fossil fuel export pipeline to be built, at the very moment it is traveling to global climate talks to call for ambitious climate action," said Slocum. "Why did the government backtrack on a modest demand for a greenhouse gas emissions analysis for a pipeline and instead rubber-stamp a major fossil fuel project?"
"The green light for the Saguaro pipeline project," he added, "shows yet again that the Biden administration's support for unfettered fossil fuel exports compromises its position to address the climate crisis."
Days after U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken addressed the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference and warned that food insecurity "is made worse by our warming climate," government watchdog Public Citizen wrote to the top diplomat Wednesday, demanding to know why—if he is concerned about planetary heating—his agency recently approved the construction of a fracked gas pipeline.
The group was particularly perplexed by the fact that the State Department approved Oneok's Saguaro pipeline even though two weeks earlier, the Bureau of Energy Resources had ignored a request for a federally mandated emissions review for the project.
"Today Public Citizen requests that the U.S. Department of State explain why it abdicated its authority to grant a favorable recommendation for a natural gas export pipeline without first obtaining a lifecycle analysis of the project's impact on greenhouse gas emissions," wrote Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's energy program. "We request a meeting with the appropriate representative to discuss."
Oneok wrote to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in December 2022, requesting a presidential permit to build and operate the proposed 155-mile pipeline, which would connect the Permian Basin in West Texas to liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals in Mexico.
"Why did the government backtrack on a modest demand for a greenhouse gas emissions analysis for a pipeline and instead rubber-stamp a major fossil fuel project?"
FERC is required to obtain a "favorable recommendation" from the State Department before granting a permit for the construction of a pipeline that would cross a U.S. border.
But in an executive action announced in September, President Joe Biden directed agencies to consider the greenhouse gas impacts of new projects, "in environmental reviews conducted pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)."
As such, Public Citizen noted in its letter, Hagen Maroney, deputy director of the State Department's Office of Global Change wrote to FERC on November 8 requesting "a greenhouse gas emissions analysis for the Saguaro pipeline project that covers lifecycle upstream and downstream greenhouse gas emissions."
Both FERC and Oneok refused to cooperate with the request, saying it was "beyond the scope" of the agency's analysis—but nevertheless, on November 13, the company and the commission were granted a favorable recommendation for the presidential permit.
As Reuters reported in June, U.S. companies were on track to approve three LNG export projects capable of processing 5.1 billion cubic feet per day (bcfd)—a record annual volume for LNG projects.
The U.S. became the largest producer of LNG in 2022, with exports expected to reach 12.1 bcfd this year and 12.7 bcfd in 2024.
"The Biden administration must explain why it is allowing a major fossil fuel export pipeline to be built, at the very moment it is traveling to global climate talks to call for ambitious climate action," said Slocum. "Why did the government backtrack on a modest demand for a greenhouse gas emissions analysis for a pipeline and instead rubber-stamp a major fossil fuel project?"
"The green light for the Saguaro pipeline project," he added, "shows yet again that the Biden administration's support for unfettered fossil fuel exports compromises its position to address the climate crisis."