SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
environmental justice
Gas Export Terminals Are Making Texas and Louisiana Sick: We Must Stop It
Now is the time to make our voices heard before the haze, smog, and soot choke the sky for good and while there is still time remaining for the Biden administration to reject the many LNG export applications in the queue.
Jan 18, 2025
No one likes bad air days. Days when the air smells wrong; the sky is choked with haze, smog, soot; and the weather report has to invent new shades of purple to warn us to stay inside. But what people might not know is that bad air is literally killing us and making us less healthy.
And the build out of liquefied “natural” gas (LNG) export terminals along the Texas and Louisiana coast is making it worse.
A large percentage of U.S. “natural” gas production, which is just fracked methane gas, isn’t used here at home, but now gets shipped directly overseas. The terminals where this gas is turned into a liquid and loaded onto massive tankers emit all sorts of harmful air pollution. These facilities have a permit to pollute, but a recent report shows that just because the government signs off on something doesn’t mean it won’t kill you.
Maybe the most frustrating part of this whole story is that Texas and Louisiana taxpayers are footing the bill for all this suffering.
Seven of the currently operating LNG export terminals are estimated to cause 60 premature deaths every year due to flaring and other emissions. And there are many, many more such terminals in the planning stages looking to become operational within the decade, potentially upping that number to almost 150 premature deaths per year. The “soot” and “smog” that form from the resulting particulate matter and ozone also cause a range of other health problems, including asthma, and lead to people having to miss school and work, and cost us health impacts worth billions of dollars.
These LNG terminals plan to operate for decades to come, and if you add up the health impacts over time it amounts to over 4,000 deaths by 2050. The coastal communities that live in the shadow of these massive facilities face the highest per capita health impacts, but particulate matter and ozone don’t stay confined near their source. They are regional pollutants that can travel hundreds of miles and still cause harm.
As we speak, Harris County, Texas, home to Houston; and Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana are estimated to suffer the most deaths due to LNG terminal air pollution. Dallas County is No. 3, even though it is 250 miles from the nearest LNG terminal.
This report only looks at LNG terminals, but the dirty secret is that many places in Texas and Louisiana are already over-polluted. Oil refineries, petrochemical plants, coal plants, and more are already contributing to air pollution and health harms in the region. This frenzy to export methane gas is only pouring new pollution on top of old.
In Southwest Louisiana, decades of toxic emissions from refineries and petrochemical plants have polluted the air and contaminated the upper Calcasieu River, leading to a seafood advisory, limiting the amount of fish locals can eat. LNG export facilities have expanded this industrial air pollution to communities that had never faced these issues before. Now, residents frequently hear warning alarms and witness massive flares spewing black smoke into the sky. Many in the community report symptoms such as frequent headaches and worsening respiratory problems, clear signs of the harmful impact this pollution is having on their health.
For generations, fishermen in Cameron Parish, Louisiana have depended on the bounty of the estuaries and wetlands, providing for their families and communities. These waters were once an integral part of the local culture and economy, passed down from father to son. After rebuilding through storm after storm, these same families now face a new challenge—being displaced by a multi-billion-dollar industry that not only pollutes their environment but jeopardizes their ability to sustain themselves from it. The risks that coastal communities face like coastal erosion and extreme weather are worsened by the climate crisis, which the LNG industry ironically helps fuel.
Maybe the most frustrating part of this whole story is that Texas and Louisiana taxpayers are footing the bill for all this suffering. Another report from late last year showed how several of these LNG companies have received tax handouts in the billions of dollars, taking money away from needed resources like health and safety services. All this on the promise of good paying jobs to local folks that never materialize. And what’s more, every tanker of LNG that gets shipped overseas raises energy prices here at home.
Talk about a raw deal.
But after nearly a decade of rubber stamping these terminals, the federal government just took a closer look.The U.S. Department of Energy, who authorizes LNG for export, just updated its studies used to determine whether LNG exports actually serve the public interest. The studies conclude that LNG exports raise energy prices, inflame climate change, sabotage the clean energy transition, and cause harm to our local communities.
The incoming presidential administration may try to ignore the evidence. To expect them to choose what’s right for Texas and Louisiana—let’s just say, unfortunately, we won’t be holding our breath.
Now is the time to make our voices heard before the haze, smog, and soot choke the sky for good and while there are still a few days remaining that the Biden administration can reject the many LNG export applications in the queue. We all need to act now to protect the air in Louisiana and Texas, and everyone from the worst of the climate crisis.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Community Benefits Agreements Can Embed Justice in the Clean Energy Transition
In states that are leading the way, CBAs ensure that energy projects provide clean power and bring economic and social benefits to the communities most impacted.
Jan 11, 2025
The clean energy transition is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build momentum for environmental justice.
As the transition accelerates, we face a choice: Will it reproduce the harms of the past fossil fuel-based energy system, or will it create a fairer, more just future where more people can access and benefit from accessible and affordable clean energy? For far too long, historically marginalized communities have been excluded from decisions about the challenges they face, and energy infrastructure is no exception.
Community Benefits Agreements (CBAs) are a tool for ensuring frontline communities receive real, tangible benefits from renewable energy projects.
States that embrace policies like CBAs are showing what’s possible: a future where energy solutions uplift communities rather than burden them.
CBAs are legally binding agreements between developers and communities that outline commitments such as local job creation, workforce training, or investments in public infrastructure. In states that are leading the way, CBAs ensure that energy projects provide clean power and bring economic and social benefits to the communities most impacted. From Michigan to California, states are showing what’s possible:
- In Michigan, developers pay host communities $2,000 per megawatt of energy capacity.
- In California, enforceable agreements with grassroots organizations ensure benefits flow directly to local people.
- In Maine, wind projects deliver long-term financial contributions to communities hosting the turbines.
These policies are not just about energy infrastructure; they represent a shift in power, creating systemic change for equity, accountability, and justice, giving those communities most affected by energy development a voice along with a share of benefits. These state successes show what's possible, but to scale these benefits nationwide, we need stronger federal and state policies working in tandem—like the Justice40 Initiative.
The federal Justice40 Initiative aims to allocate 40% of federal climate and energy investment benefits to communities that have long been overburdened by pollution and underinvestment. State policies require CBAs to build on this foundation, ensuring that energy projects are designed with and for communities that have historically been excluded from decision-making.
By centering racial justice in the clean energy transition, CBAs can:
- Deliver good-paying local jobs.
- Fund schools, public health, and infrastructure.
- Empower communities to shape the projects in their backyards.
Yet CBAs are only as strong as the policies that back them. Some developers will inevitably try to exploit loopholes, sidestep accountability, or push vague agreements that deliver little. In California, legally enforceable agreements with grassroots organizations ensure that the benefits of renewable energy projects flow directly to the local communities hosting them. To advance energy justice, CBAs must be enforceable (legally binding), transparent, and community-driven, and not just another box for developers to check.
We are at a turning point. State governments have a chance to lead by mandating strong, enforceable CBAs and ensuring communities are part of the decision-making process. This isn’t just about clean energy—it’s about repairing harm, investing in people, and building a just energy future.
The clean energy transition can be more than reducing emissions—it can be a powerful pathway to justice, equity, and community empowerment. States that embrace policies like CBAs are showing what’s possible: a future where energy solutions uplift communities rather than burden them.
By centering racial justice in the clean energy transition, CBAs can deliver tangible benefits that create lasting change:
- Good-paying local jobs that boost economic opportunity.
- Funding for schools, public health, and infrastructure to address long-standing inequities.
- Empowered communities that have a say in shaping projects in their own backyards.
CBAs ensure that historically excluded communities move from being merely hosts of energy infrastructure to being active partners and beneficiaries of the clean energy revolution.
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Earthquake Environmental Justice Advocates Aren’t Talking About
The environmental movement from within the belly of the beast must recognize that it needs to be part of the growing anti-war movement and push for the U.S. to take its hands off Syria.
Jan 04, 2025
On December 15, many people in Syria felt the earthquake. Seismic scales registered above 3.0 on the Richter scale and could be felt at least 500 miles away. Natural disasters usually have the attention of people around the world. When earthquakes happen, humanitarian workers and supplies are sent to help out. After hurricanes, organizations release statements responding to the urgency of the climate crisis and hypothetical transitions away from fossil fuels.
In Syria, what happened on December 15 wasn’t an earthquake—it was a massive airstrike that Israel carried out in Syria. This ongoing bombardment is reciprocally destructive to daily life and the environment as it continues to push the climate crisis further through jarring fossil fuel consumption.
But where are the environmental organizations? Many organizations that would typically release these statements after “natural” disasters have been silent. Except this was not a natural disaster—and the countries that would typically send “humanitarian aid” are the ones that caused this quake to happen. This deliberate mass destruction came shortly after the U.S. dropped dozens of bombs in just a few hours after the fall of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
The U.S. has carried out this disastrous project through the extraction of oil in the ground for the sake of extracting more oil from the ground.
The bewildering longtime silence of environmental organizations when it comes to U.S. militarism is not representative of any genuine commitment to climate justice. The most heavily weighted factors in their silence may be a blissful ignorance from the normalization of a whitewashed “environmentalism,” or the fear of repression and financial repercussions of taking popular anti-war stances. Regardless, the murderous result is antithetical to everything they profess.
A June 2024 United Nations report on the environmental impact of the genocide in Gaza highlighted the catastrophic impacts of Israel’s incessant bombing on the ecosystem, water quality, air quality, and soil in Gaza. Genocide doesn’t just cause ecocide, isn’t just parallel to ecocide, but is also a result of ecocide. Ecocide is a tactic of genocide. The long-term damage to every ecological foundation in Gaza makes it harder and harder to sustain life. Life can’t be sustained without agriculture or without clean drinking water. And now, the U.S. and Israel are attempting to repeat this cycle of destruction in Syria, just as they have started to in Lebanon.
Regardless of how hard the imperialism and war economy of Western powers try to create a lavish life for its beneficiaries at the expense of everyone else, it is fundamentally impossible to sustain life for anyone when war-making tools continue to devastate the planet. The grim irony is that the war economy eats its own makers.
The first 120 days of the genocide in Gaza alone produced more emissions than 26 countries combined. Every new base that is established across the globe contaminates the soil that it occupies, harming the ecosystem and the valuable biodiversity that is critical for sustaining life. As it builds bases over occupied land globally, the military literally steamrolls over survival.
Now, the U.S. and Israel are taking advantage of a destabilized Syria to eat away at the nation’s territory to gain more standing in a dangerous escalation against Iran. This is the newest development in a decades-long conquest for dominance in the oil industry that environmental organizations have long campaigned shifts away from. The U.S. has carried out this disastrous project through the extraction of oil in the ground for the sake of extracting more oil from the ground, destroying homes, families, and nations in the process, all while stumbling into the possibility of planetary destruction via climate collapse, nuclear winter, or both.
U.S.-made Israeli bombs have killed multiple civilians in Yemen in the past weeks. Meanwhile, the “cease-fire” reached in Lebanon continues to be breached as toxic bombs rain down on the people of the country daily, while fossil fuels are unleashed in the sky, which has already led to island nations that toxic U.S. bases occupy becoming inhabitable.
Since Assad’s fall, Israel has claimed more land in Syria than all of Gaza. The more that Israel and its allies encroach on this land, the more emboldened the U.S.-Israeli regime becomes in its terrorism throughout the region and the more it risks our global future. The short- and long-term survival of the people of Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, and Yemen are increasingly threatened due to ecological devastation while they fight to prevent U.S.-made bombs from continuing to destroy their homes every single day. Is their disposability so blinding that these NGOs sacrifice themselves? The longer we escalate, the more emissions will be released from this catastrophe and the longer that crucial biodiversity and Indigenous caretaking will be destroyed.
So, amid this war that is causing complete ecological and planetary devastation, where is the mainstream climate movement? When the U.S. military is the largest institutional polluter in the world, consuming 4.6 billion gallons of fuel annually (77-80% of all U.S. government energy consumption), how can its deadliest campaign in years be ignored by those who seek to protect the planet? When the bombs the U.S. manufactures register on the Richter scale, how is that not a threat to the environment? How is nuclear winter not a threat to agricultural global survival? How can the groups that claim to care about our well-being not stand against a deadly bombing campaign in Syria and possible war with Iran or Russia?
The anti-war movement from within the U.S. is at its strongest in decades. The majority of Americans want a cease-fire in Gaza. The environmental movement from within the belly of the beast must recognize that it needs to be part of this anti-war movement and push for the U.S. to take its hands off Syria. It must raise the public’s consciousness of the dangers of war with Iran. When we think about existential threats to the planet, environmental organizations should be looking at the ecological devastation that Israel and the U.S. are causing and ask themselves why they haven’t done or said a damn thing about the elephant in the room.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular