Last week, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission moved to suspend approval of the controversial Calcasieu Pass 2 liquefied natural gas export terminal while it assesses its air quality impacts, leading to The community was granted a “temporary reprieve.”
FERC rejected Venture Global’s CP2 over objections from local residents who say the company’s nearly identical Calcasieu Pass terminal already pollutes the air, disrupts ecosystems and fisheries in Cameron Parish, Louisiana, and negatively impacts health and livelihoods. Despite this, it was approved in late June.
“This order confirms that FERC recognizes that the environmental impacts of CP2 LNG are too great to pass real scrutiny,” Megan Gibson, senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), said in a statement Monday. It makes that clear.”
“FERC’s construction moratorium may provide some temporary reprieve, but this project should never have been approved in the first place.”
FERC’s decision supports front-line residents, Fishermen for a Better Bayou and Fishermen of Our Heritage (FISH), and community organizations including the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council. This was in response to a request for reconsideration of the June decision submitted. In their requests, organizations and individuals pointed out errors the commission made in its approval decisions.
“This order allows FERC to properly consider the cumulative harm to local communities caused by building so many LNG export terminals in such close proximity,” said Nathan Matthews, senior attorney for the Sierra Club. It looks like they’re finally going to admit that they haven’t worked hard enough to do that.” said in a statement. “Banning construction of CP2 LNG while FERC reviews the environmental impacts of this massive polluting facility is the right move.”
“Nonetheless,” Matthews continued, “FERC must now properly assess the true extent of the risks gas infrastructure poses to communities and take concrete steps to avoid unwarranted approvals in the future. ”
FERC’s decision comes four months after the D.C. Circuit reversed the commission’s approval, citing concerns that it had not adequately assessed the impacts of air pollution emissions from the Commonwealth LNG project, also located in Louisiana. It was given down later. Now, advocates on the front lines are asking FERC to conduct a proper assessment when considering CP2’s environmental impacts.
“Through the lens of optical gas imaging, we witnessed massive plumes of toxic gases, undeniable evidence that these projects are polluting the air we breathe,” said Better Bayou. James Hyatt, Director of , spoke about the LNG export facility. “Modeling must use the most up-to-date data from the most local sources to fully understand the harm these facilities cause to Cameron Parish. Anything less is a betrayal to our community.” FERC must choose justice over profit and stop sacrificing people for polluters.”
SELC’s Gibson said FERC has already repeated some of the mistakes in approving CP2 in a new order.
“The continued failure to meet our regulatory obligations is not just an oversight, but a failure to protect vulnerable communities and our nation’s economy from the real and potential harms of this massive export project,” Gibson said. That’s true.”
FERC’s decision comes as the fate of LNG construction itself hangs in the balance. The Biden administration’s Department of Energy is currently rushing to complete a new assessment of whether LNG exports are in the public interest. Environmental and frontline groups say not to do so, citing local pollution, rising domestic utility bills and contributing to the climate emergency. CP2 alone will emit 8,510,099 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year, which is about the same as adding 1,850,000 new gasoline cars to the road.
President-elect Donald Trump has promised “drill, baby, drill” and is likely to ignore any conclusions from the Biden administration, but strong statements against LNG exports could lead to legal challenges to Trump’s energy policy. It will help strengthen it.
At the same time, Bill McKibben wrote in a Tuesday column that the government’s suspension of LNG export approvals while it updates public interest standards is slowing industry expansion, and that FERC’s reconsideration of CP2 may He said this could cause further delays.
“The vote on the new review is 4-0 and bipartisan,” McKibben wrote. “Approval of this project could be delayed until perhaps the third quarter of next year. And that’s good news, because the price difference between clean solar, wind and solar power is increasing month by month. , as the basis for new LNG exports shrinks, and battery power and fossil fuel prices continue to rise. ”
Ultimately, advocates on the Gulf Coast frontline want to see LNG build-up halted altogether.
“I, along with the fishermen of Cameron, Louisiana, know firsthand how harmful LNG exports are and how they poison our families, our seafood, and show a complete disregard for human life. We’re seeing it firsthand,” said Travis Darder, a Cameron Indigenous fisherman and founder of FISH. , Louisiana. “FERC’s construction halt may provide some temporary reprieve, but this project should never have been approved in the first place. For those who believe in the fairy tale that LNG will be cleaner, we are losing our communities and livelihoods. You’ve paid the price. It’s time to break these chains and move away from this false solution. ”
Roysheta Ozane, a prominent anti-LNG activist and founder of the Louisiana Vessel Project, said that as a mother in the environmental justice community, “I have seen firsthand how LNG facilities prioritize profits over the well-being of families.” I’ve come,” he said. CP2 is no exception. ”
“We are happy with the delay, but these projects do not need to be approved and neither do any other LNG facilities,” Ozane continued. “My children are suffering from health conditions that threaten their daily lives, but regulators and elected officials are turning a blind eye. Our leaders are putting people before profits. It’s time to prioritize the health of our communities over the pollution that harms us.” We deserve a future where our children’s health is protected, not sacrificed. . ”
