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
pipelines
Trump Moves to Fast-Track 100+ Dirty Fossil Fuel Permits Under 'Fake' Energy Emergency
"Trump's promise to cut Americans' energy bills is a lie," said one campaigner.
Feb 19, 2025
With more than 100 permits for oil pipeline projects and gas-fired power plants likely to be fast-tracked under U.S. President Donald Trump's so-called "energy emergency" declaration, consumer advocates on Wednesday called on lawmakers and state officials to stand up to the president's "bullying" and block his efforts to build pollution-causing fossil fuel projects—and slow clean energy progress.
"Trump's declaration of a sham energy emergency attempts to set into motion the weaponization of national security law to dismantle generations of public health and safety protections," said Tyler Slocum, director of Public Citizen's energy program. "The ultrawealthy fossil fuel executives who donated huge sums to Trump's campaign see this fraudulent emergency declaration as an opportunity to destroy the remarkable progress of wind and solar development, while maximizing fossil fuel exports and domestic consumption."
Trump signed a day-one executive order claiming that the U.S. faces an "energy emergency" and must "unleash" fossil fuel production—which has already been on the rise in recent years despite clear warnings from scientists that oil, gas, and coal extraction must end in order to avoid catastrophic planetary hearing.
"Trump's national energy emergency is a sham."
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers cited that order in recent days when it created a new "emergency" designation for infrastructure project permits, paving the way for officials to push forward nearly 700 pending applications, including more than 100 for fossil fuel projects.
Clean Water Action toldThe New York Times that one major project it has fought against, Canadian firm Enbridge's Line 5 pipeline, which the company wants to build under the Mackinac Straits, could threaten the Great Lakes and tens of millions of people who rely on them for drinking water.
"If this is pushed through on an emergency permit, the implications of an oil spill if there's an explosion or something during tunnel construction is that over 700 miles of Great Lakes shoreline could be at risk," Sean McBrearty, Michigan policy director for Clean Water Action, told the Times.
"If approved, this project will risk our fresh water and the millions of people who rely on it for drinking, jobs, and tourism in exchange for a foreign oil company's profits," added McBrearty.
On Wednesday, U.S. Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)—who earlier this month introduced a resolution challenging Trump's emergency declaration—held a Capitol Hill press conference with environmental leaders.
"We are producing more energy now than at any other point in our history, and the U.S. is the envy of the world when it comes to energy innovation and production," Kaine said at the event. "The passage of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act have accelerated clean energy projects and created jobs, and we are on an amazing trajectory."
"Trump's sham emergency threatens to screw all of that up," Kaine added. "Why? Because he'd rather benefit Big Oil and suspend environmental protections than lower costs and create jobs for the American people. I hope my colleagues will join me in voting to terminate President Trump's emergency."
Heinrich said: "Trump's fake emergency declaration is causing enormous uncertainty. If you're thinking about opening a new factory, you don't know what your tax structure will be in the next 12 months. If you're trying to site and build a new transmission line, the federal agencies you work with just had a ton of their expert staff sacked, making it more difficult to get a permit."
"This is going to kill skilled trades jobs and drive up the cost of your electricity bills by as much at $480 a year by 2030," the senator added. "Trump's war on affordable, American-made energy is killing jobs and raising costs on working families."
Slocum urged senators to back Kaine and Heinrich's resolution.
"Trump's promise to cut Americans' energy bills is a lie, as every action under the fraudulent energy emergency would subject Americans to higher energy burdens," he said on Wednesday. "Having senators support Senate Joint Resolution 10 is a first step, but every governor of states in the Northeast and West Coast targeted by Trump's phony emergency order needs to stand up to his bullying."
The headline of this article has been changed to reflect that President Donald Trump's executive order moved to expedite the permit approval process rather than fast-tracking projects.
Keep ReadingShow Less
I Measured Pollution From Hundreds of Gas Stoves; What I Learned Still Haunts Me
To protect D.C. and Maryland residents from the health-harming impacts of NO2, policymakers must act to help households move to pollution-free, efficient electric appliances such as induction cooktops.
Jan 31, 2025
We were squeezed together in the small, upstairs bedroom of a single-family home in D.C.’s Columbia Heights neighborhood. George, the homeowner and father of a nine-month-old, had brought us there to test for nitrogen dioxide emissions from his gas stove.
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is one of several pollutants created when gas is burned. A pulmonary irritant, NO2 is invisible, odorless, and linked to asthma and other health concerns. A recent study found that NO2 may affect child cognitive development, with higher exposure in infants associated with increased risk of behavioral problems later on. There is no indoor safety standard for NO2, but the Environmental Protection Agency has established an outdoor health protective standard of 100 parts per billion for one-hour exposure. George’s kitchen had registered an alarming 294 ppb.
George had asked us to test his nursery upstairs, well away from the gas stove. We placed the detector in the crib and waited. Then, a reading of 190 ppb flashed across the screen—nearly twice the EPA’s maximum exposure limit.
There is no reason a nine-month-old—or any of us—should be breathing health-harming nitrogen dioxide in our homes.
George’s house was one of nearly 700 D.C. and Maryland homes we tested as part of a community study to investigate hazardous emissions from gas. We chose to focus on gas stoves because they are located in the middle of families’ living areas and generally not vented outside. In apartments, single-family homes, condos, and row houses, we recorded NO2 levels 15 minutes and 30 minutes after turning on the stove, and took a third reading 15 minutes after turning the stove off.
Nearly two-thirds of the kitchens we tested registered NO2 levels exceeding 100 parts per billion. In D.C., 77% of kitchens register NO2 over 100 ppb, with an average high reading of 181 ppb.
The stories are endless. In an American University student apartment NO2 levels spiked to 862 ppb—over eight times the recommended limit—and only decreased after turning on a vent fan. In other homes, ventilation fans seemed to have no impact at all. We found significant NO2 in the upstairs bedrooms we tested. Some kitchens tested had elevated NO2 levels one or two hours after the gas stove was turned off.
Increasing ventilation can help reduce NO2 exposure from gas stoves. But to protect D.C. and Maryland residents from the health-harming impacts of NO2, policymakers must act to help households move to pollution-free, efficient electric appliances such as induction cooktops.
Induction cooking is becoming the preferred choice among chefs due to its efficiency, safety, and ease of use. Chef Jon Kung switched to induction cooking because his building lacked ventilation and gas stoves produced indoor air pollution. Award-winning chef Eric Ripert says he “fell in love” with induction within days.
Induction cooktops rely on electromagnetism to transfer heat to the pan, eliminating the combustion that creates NO2. About 90% of the energy goes toward cooking food, while gas stoves waste 70% of their energy heating the surrounding air. With no flame and little residual heat, induction stoves keep kitchens cool, reduce the risk of burns, and are easy to clean.
Officials in D.C. and Montgomery Country have already taken steps to incentivize electrification, including adopting healthy building standards that ensure new homes are built with electric equipment. Low-income D.C. residents can now apply for free home upgrades to install clean energy heating and cooking equipment thanks to the recent passage of the Healthy Homes Act.
These are steps in the right direction, but policymakers must do more to reduce reliance on fossil fuel infrastructure and to block gas companies from spending consumer money on new pipelines that raise costs for customers and lock in our reliance on gas.
With an influx of federal and state incentives, now is the best time to electrify. D.C. recently unveiled programs funded by the Inflation Reduction Act, which provide up to $800 for an induction cooktop and $2,000 for an electric panel upgrade to income-eligible residents. Federal tax breaks for clean, efficient heating equipment and cooking equipment are available to all residents regardless of income.
Our Beyond Gas study shows that burning fossil fuels in our homes is exposing us to pollutants that make us sicker. There is no reason a nine-month-old—or any of us—should be breathing health-harming nitrogen dioxide in our homes. Clean energy alternatives are available and far superior. Our leaders need to act now to help D.C. and Maryland residents make this change.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Alaska's North Slope Gasline Is a Cautionary Tale for Fossil Fuel Boosters Like Trump
The allure of quick profits from resource extraction often comes at the expense of long-term sustainability, not just for the environment but for taxpayers too.
Jan 30, 2025
Alaska's vast wilderness and abundant natural resources have long been a source of pride and a cornerstone of its economy, supporting sustainable industries like fishing and tourism and resource development like logging, mining, and drilling. With large swaths of open lands and waters, spectacular views, abundant wildlife, and unique geological elements like volcanos and glaciers, Alaska holds an almost mythical allure for Americans. There is a perception of endless opportunity, but these riches also come with responsibility—both for Alaskans and for the rest of the nation.
Recently, U.S. President Donald Trump signed a sweeping executive order titled "Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential," aiming to boost oil and gas drilling, mining, and logging in the state by rolling back numerous protective actions implemented by the Biden administration. While this move has been met with enthusiasm by some state leaders, others urge caution considering the environmental and fiscal responsibilities that would ensue if its intentions were realized.
Alaska is unlike any other state when it comes to natural resources. About 61% of Alaska's land is owned by the federal government, meaning what happens in Alaska is not only a local matter, it is also a national one. The executive order impacts public lands that belong to all Americans and some that are sacred to Indigenous peoples. Protecting Alaska's wild lands and resources isn't just Alaska's responsibility; it's a shared duty for all of us.
President Trump's executive orders may promise economic growth, but they fail to account for the real costs of overextending our natural and financial resources.
And yet the push to exploit these lands often rests on flimsy economic premises that fail to stand the test of time. Take the North Slope Gasline; For 15 years, the state-owned Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC) has promoted this project as a game-changer, spending nearly half a billion dollars of public money. Despite this significant public investment, no tangible progress has been made. A new report, Alaska's Pipe Dream: The Economic Folly of the North Slope Gasline, released by a coalition of groups, reveals what many already suspected: AGDC continues to spend millions on a gasline that's no closer to fruition than when it was first proposed in 2008.
The numbers are grim. The latest version of the proposed 800-mile gasline for LNG export is projected to cost a staggering $44 billion, while global market trends are rapidly shifting away from fossil fuels toward renewable energy sources. Meanwhile, Alaska continues to write checks—nearly $500 million so far—hoping for a miracle that seems increasingly unlikely.
Imagine what could have been done with that money: better schools, improved healthcare, resilient infrastructure, or renewable energy investments that would genuinely prepare Alaska for the future. Instead, the state continues to sink public dollars into a project that doesn't pencil out, hoping it will magically deliver economic salvation.
In addition to being an economic bust, the gasline would exacerbate global warming, locking in extensive fossil fuel use for decades into the future. With its effects on warming 80 times greater than carbon dioxide on a short-term basis, addressing methane emissions is crucial in efforts to combat climate change and mitigate its impacts.
This is a cautionary tale for all Americans. The allure of quick profits from resource extraction often comes at the expense of long-term sustainability, not just for the environment but for taxpayers too. President Trump's executive orders may promise economic growth, but they fail to account for the real costs of overextending our natural and financial resources.
Alaska can't afford to be reckless with its land, money, or reputation. Whether it's the AGDC's pipe dream or new drilling and mining projects, we need to ask tougher questions about who would benefit and at what cost. Rushing into poorly planned developments risks leaving future generations to clean up the mess—financially and environmentally.
For those who dream of traveling to Alaska to view bears, moose, caribou, eagles, whales, and sea otters in their natural habitats, this matters. For those who seek exceptional fishing, hiking, camping, kayaking, heli-skiing, and cultural experiences, this matters.
For those who cherish the idea of public lands remaining pristine and accessible, this matters. Alaska's resources belong to all Americans, and so does the responsibility of ensuring they're managed wisely.
Leaders in Alaska—and across the country—should learn from the past and make decisions that reflect the realities of today's economy and tomorrow's environmental needs. As an initial step, efforts to build the North Slope gasline should be abandoned. It's time to pull the plug on this ill-conceived venture and look to renewables to meet our current and future energy needs.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular