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
Keystone XL By Any Other Name Will Be Just As Crudely Sour
The Big Oil powers that be have a Keystone XL obsession that just won’t die. Opponents are just as adamant that it won’t be built.
Apr 08, 2026
Here we go again.
The Big Oil powers that be have a Keystone XL obsession that just won’t die. Opponents are just as adamant that it won’t be built. The latest industry brainstorm is to bring a whole bunch of dirty tar sands oil from Canada to Guernsey, Wyoming, and then… well, “some future company” would need to build an additional pipeline, in order to get that oil down to refineries on the Gulf Coast. That’s a risky plan for a pipeline investor.
To review: The pipeline company TransCanada, which later became TC Energy and then recently spun off into new corporate entity “South Bow,” first proposed building the Alberta to Texas tar sands pipeline in 2008. As a trans-boundary pipeline, it required not only state permits and land acquisition from farmers and ranchers along the route, but also a Presidential Permit determining it to be in the national interest.
It was sailing along its permitting process despite opposition from First Nations in Canada, when climate scientist James Hansen pointed out that if the super-dirty high-carbon Alberta tar sands were fully developed it would be “game over” for the climate. At the same time, farmers and ranchers in Nebraska noticed that the route went through the fragile Sand Hills region and threatened the Ogallala aquifer. A battle royale ensued, with an unlikely alliance of farmers and ranchers, students, tribal nations, grassroots climate activists, and environmental nonprofits joining together against KXL supporters, which included the Alberta government, the Canadian government, the Republican Party, about half of the Democratic Party, and the entire oil industry.
To call this plan half-baked would be an insult to baking.
Remarkably, the unlikely alliance won. Barack Obama denied the Presidential Permit in 2015. Donald Trump approved it on the first day of his first term, but litigation prevented it from moving forward for the next four years. Joe Biden re-cancelled it on the first day of his presidency, and KXL was not built.
Now, however, there is an inkling of a plan to sort of revive KXL, although “plan” is an exaggeration. A company called Bridger is testing the waters by proposing to take bitumen, the technical term for the thick gooey hydrocarbon also known as tar sands or oil sands, from Alberta and pipe it through Montana to Guernsey, Wyoming. From there, according to press reports, “spurs” would be “bolted on” to take it to refining hubs and to the Gulf Coast for export. But it’s over 700 miles from Guernsey to the hub in Cushing, Olahoma, and over 400 miles to Steele City, Nebraska, where it could connect to existing underutilized pipelines.
Four hundred (400) miles is not exactly a “spur” that you “bolt on.” In fact, that route would require a state permit from the Nebraska Public Service Commission, and the acquisition of land—through eminent domain if necessary—from hundreds of Nebraskans. The process would take years, and generate the same controversy it did back in the early 2010’s. And if South Bow fails to get the full route built before the militantly pro-oil US president is out of office, the cross-border Presidential Permit could be denied—again. That “spur,” potentially cutting across the entire state of Nebraska, is the part that “some future company” would be responsible for. To call this plan half-baked would be an insult to baking.
The current war in Iran is making oil and energy markets more volatile than anytime since the 1970’s, with oil prices over $100. That might make it seem that tar sands oil, which is not only the dirtiest but most expensive oil to produce, could still make money. But in the long run, oil will probably settle somewhere under $100, because that’s where Saudi Arabia, OPEC, and the US producers want it—high enough to generate high profits, but not high enough to provoke recession. And in the even longer run, the world will inevitably electrify transportation, because this dependence on oil, with its wars and spills and price spikes and insecurity and pollution and global warming, is just too crazy.
Let’s add up the risks:
- The US is producing more oil than ever, and doesn’t need dirty Canadian tar sands oil.
- ”The future company” and the second half of the project connecting down to the Gulf may never materialize, making this a pipeline to nowhere.
- If the Venezuelan oil sector is revived, it will have easier access to the Texas refineries and export facilities than Alberta tar sands oil.
- The price of oil in the long run is only marginally high enough for tar sands oil to be profitable.
- The opposition to taking of land by eminent domain will be intense, especially for a project that will export oil.
- A pipeline like this will cost billions of dollars.
- A pipeline like this will spill and contaminate land and water along the route.
- Climate change is still real, even if the US government denies it.
- The US president will not grant a permit with nothing in return; he will want a piece of the action.
Let’s add up the rewards:
- A few thousand short term construction jobs.
- A few dozen permanent jobs.
- Tax revenue for counties along the route.
The risks far outweigh the rewards. Which is why this pipeline should not be built.
The US Bureau of Land Management and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality are now jointly accepting public comments on permit applications for the project through May 1, and holding several public meetings in Montana.
Bold Nebraska, the group that helped lead the original fight against Keystone XL by organizing farmers and ranchers along the route into an unlikely alliance with Tribal Nations, grassroots advocates, and national environmental groups, is collecting comments from citizens for the docket that it will deliver by mail on the May 1 deadline. Click here to use Bold’s form to submit a public comment to oppose the new “Keystone Light” pipeline project.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As His Iran War Drives Up Oil Prices, Trump Orders Restart of California Offshore Drilling
“Mandating a restart of these defective oil pipelines won’t curb high gas prices, but it will put coastal wildlife at huge risk of another oil spill," one advocate said.
Mar 14, 2026
State leaders and environmental advocates responded with outrage after the Trump administration on Friday ordered the restarting of a California pipeline that caused one of the largest oil spills in the state's history, a move that comes as oil prices have skyrocketed following President Donald Trump's launching of an illegal war against Iran and Iran's subsequent closure of the Strait of Hormuz.
After Trump issued an executive order on Friday authorizing the Department of Energy (DOE) to ramp up oil and gas development under the Defense Production Act, Energy Secretary Chris Wright ordered Sable Offshore Corp. to restart operations on the Santa Ynez Unit and Pipeline System, which include an offshore rig and a network of offshore and onshore pipelines along the Santa Barbara coast. Among them is a pipeline that ruptured in 2015, spilling around 450,000 gallons of oil into Refugio State Beach and killing hundreds of marine mammals and sea birds.
“Californians have repeatedly rejected dangerous drilling off our coast for decades," Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said in a statement on Saturday. "Now, after dragging the US into a war with Iran and driving up oil prices, the Trump administration is trying to exploit this crisis to further enrich the oil industry at the expense of our communities and our environment."
In his statement, Wright emphasized the defense benefits of resuming drilling, arguing that "today’s order will strengthen America’s oil supply and restore a pipeline system vital to our national security and defense, ensuring that West Coast military installations have the reliable energy critical to military readiness.”
“Directing a private oil company to push its project through without safety checks and adherence to California laws that keep our coast safe is appalling and illegal."
The DOE added that "Sable's facility can produce approximately 50,000 barrels of oil per day, a 15% increase to California’s in-state oil production, that can replace nearly 1.5 million barrels of foreign crude each month."
Yet, far from a novel response to an unexpected emergency, the order is actually an escalation in a preexisting battle between California and the Trump administration over the future of the pipeline system. The state's Attorney General Rob Bonta sued to stop the administration from a federal takeover of two of the pipelines in January.
Sable also faces several lawsuits due to its attempts to restart the system after it purchased it from ExxonMobil in 2024, and has not yet cleared all of the state permitting requirements, according to the Center for Biological Diversity.
"In its latest brazen abuse of power, the Trump administration is attempting to seize exclusive federal control over two of California’s onshore pipelines," Bonta said on social media Friday evening. "We will not stand by as this administration continues their unlawful all-out assault on California and our coastlines, and we are reviewing all of our legal options."
California Gov. Gavin Newsom also spoke out against Wright's announcement.
"Trump knew his war with Iran would raise gas prices," he wrote on social media. "Now he wants to illegally resurrect a pipeline shut down by courts and facing criminal charges. And it won't even cut prices. I refuse to let Trump sacrifice Californians, our environment, or our $51 billion coastal economy."
The Center for Biological Diversity noted that this order would mark the first time that the Defense Production Act was used to force an oil company to restart out-of-use Infrastructure and to disregard the state permitting process.
“This is a revolting power grab by an extremist president. Trump is misusing this Cold War-era law just to help a Texas oil company skirt vital state laws that protect our coastline, and Californians will pay the price,” Talia Nimmer, an attorney for the center, said. “Mandating a restart of these defective oil pipelines won’t curb high gas prices, but it will put coastal wildlife at huge risk of another oil spill. Overriding state law to let an oil company restart pipelines sets a radically dangerous precedent. It’s clear that no state is safe from Trump.”
The center also promised to push back against the order.
“Directing a private oil company to push its project through without safety checks and adherence to California laws that keep our coast safe is appalling and illegal,” Nimmer said. “We’re exploring all legal avenues. This dangerous action should be swiftly blocked by the courts.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Regulators Should Remember': Louisiana Pipeline Blast Shows Risks of Methane Boom
The explosion "starkly illustrates the dangers of fossil fuel infrastructure, particularly its impact on vulnerable communities," one environmental justice leader said.
Feb 04, 2026
A pipeline explosion in Cameron Parish, Louisiana—a coastal community in the epicenter of the liquefied natural gas buildout—offers an object lesson in the immediate dangers posed by oil and gas expansion, frontline advocates warned.
The explosion occurred at around 11:00 am Central time on Tuesday on the Delfin LNG pipeline, injuring one worker, forcing nearby Johnson Bayou High School to shelter in place, and sending a wall of smoke and flame into the sky.
Community activist Roishetta Ozane of the Vessel Project of Louisiana said the blast "starkly illustrates the dangers of fossil fuel infrastructure, particularly its impact on vulnerable communities. This incident is a chilling reminder of the environmental injustice that disproportionately affects people of color, low-income populations, and especially fishermen."
Environmental justice campaigners and local residents, including fishers, have been pushing back in recent years against an LNG export boom in the Gulf South that threatens their local ecosystems, health, and livelihoods—not to mention the stability of the global climate.
"Today’s explosion and ongoing fire are a stark reminder that what they’re selling is highly combustible methane gas—a volatile fossil fuel.”
"This is a prime example of why we are fighting against this," Fisherman Involved in Sustaining Our Heritage (FISH) wrote in a post on Facebook in response to the news.
Cameron Parish is home to the largest LNG terminal in the country—Cheniere Energy's Sabine Pass—as well as Venture Global's controversial Calcasieu Pass terminal, which violated its air permits more than 2,000 times during its first year of operation. Residents say the pollution is harming their health and that dredging and export tankers are destroying habitat for local fisheries. The situation is only set to deteriorate, as last year the Trump administration approved construction of a second Venture Global terminal and allowed the company to increase exports from its first as part of its push to ramp up fossil energy production.
Delfin is part of the LNG expansion. It is constructing an offshore terminal consisting of three vessels connected to preexisting pipelines which will eventually be able to produce 4 million tons of methane gas. Preliminary actions were being performed on the line when it exploded Tuesday, Ashley Buller, assistant director of Cameron Parish's emergency preparedness department, told The Advocate.
The cause of the explosion is not yet known, though the Louisiana State Police have promised an investigation, but for watchdog groups documenting fossil fuel expansion in the state, it does not come as a surprise.
“Every minute of every day, countless corporations pump oil, gas, and chemicals across Louisiana via pipeline. That means at any given moment, a Louisiana community could be faced with a leak; an explosion; or contamination of their air, land, or water," said Anne Rolfes of the Louisiana Bucket Brigade. "The industry likes to use marketing terms like 'natural gas' to make their products seem benign, but today’s explosion and ongoing fire are a stark reminder that what they’re selling is highly combustible methane gas—a volatile fossil fuel.”
Ozane noted: "Fossil fuel pipelines pose significant risks due to leaks and explosions, exposing nearby residents to hazardous pollutants linked to severe health issues, including respiratory disorders and cancer. Often, these pipelines are placed in marginalized neighborhoods, a product of systemic inequities that prioritize corporate profit over community safety. The cumulative effects of pollution exacerbate existing health disparities, leaving these communities more vulnerable to chronic illnesses."
"The dangers extend beyond immediate incidents," she continued. "The entire lifecycle of fossil fuel extraction and consumption contributes to environmental degradation and climate change, disproportionately impacting marginalized groups. Furthermore, the rise of energy-intensive data centers, often powered by fossil fuels, adds another layer of pollution, perpetuating a cycle of harm."
"They don't only export the gas, they export the profits too."
FISH also pointed to the lingering effects of fossil fuel pollution, and criticized the official line reported in local media that there were "no off-site impacts from the explosion," calling it "one of the most disturbing industry lies."
"The air, the water, and our wetlands are impacted far beyond their chain link fences," the group wrote. "The people are not protected by chain link fences and concrete barriers."
FISH executive director Robyn Thigpen also emphasized to The Advocate that Cameron Parish's hospital had not reopened since it was damaged by Hurricane Laura in 2020, increasing the potential danger of pipeline explosions.
"It's really important that people understand they never reopened a hospital," she said.
The worker who was injured was transported to a facility in Port Arthur, Texas.
The climate crisis increases the chances of powerful storms like Laura and Rita, a 2005 hurricane which devastated the area and started a trend of long-term population decline, providing an example of how the fossil fuel industry threatens the people of Cameron Parish in multiple ways. Yet while it increases risks, the LNG boom has not brought greater prosperity to ordinary citizens of the parish.
"We are the largest exporter of natural gas in the world, and to look around this place, you would not know the wealth," For a Better Bayou Director James Hiatt told The Advocate. "Because they don't only export the gas, they export the profits too."
Community activists called on local and national leaders to reassess their reliance on fossil fuel energy sources and move toward safer renewable alternatives.
“Before approving the next pipeline, LNG export terminal, or [carbon, capture, and storage] project, Gov. [Jeff] Landry and state regulators should remember today’s incident and what these projects cost our communities," Rolfe said.
Ozane concluded: "Each explosion not only results in loss of life and property but also inflicts lasting trauma on families and communities. It is imperative to advocate for the cessation of new fossil fuel projects and demand clean energy alternatives. We must address the systemic inequalities that put vulnerable populations at risk, ensuring that no community is sacrificed for corporate gain."
Keep ReadingShow Less
A 'Dirty Deal With Trump': Hochul Draws Fury Over Fracked Gas Pipeline Approval
"Under Gov. Hochul’s leadership, New Yorkers’ voices were silenced to appease President Trump’s fossil fuel priorities," said one critic.
Nov 07, 2025
Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul came under fire Friday after her administration approved a previously rejected fracked gas pipeline over the objection of climate and conservation campaigners.
The New York Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) announced approval of permits including a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification for the proposed Northeast Supply Enhancement (NESE) pipeline. Commonly known as the Williams Pipeline, the expansion project involves the construction of a 23.5-mile fracked gas conduit beneath the Raritan Bay and Lower New York Bay. The pipeline would carry hydraulically fractured gas from Pennsylvania across New Jersey and into New York.
“As governor, a top priority is making sure the lights and heat stay on for all New Yorkers as we face potential energy shortages downstate as soon as next summer,” Hochul said in a statement. “We need to govern in reality.”
DEC assured that it is "committed to closely monitoring the project’s construction and adherence to all permit conditions to ensure the full protection of New York’s waterways."
This, after the agency twice denied water quality certification for the same pipeline for failing to demonstrate compliance with state quality standards.
In 2020, the DEC under then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who is also a Democrat, denied certification for the project after finding that the proposed pipeline was likely to harm water quality by stirring up sediment and other contaminants that “would disturb sensitive habitats, including shellfish beds.”
The advocacy group New York Communities for Change noted in a fact sheet that the project "would jack up already-high utility bills" and be a "super-polluter" that would "generate about 8 million tons of additional climate-heating and asthma-inducing air pollution each year."
"The pollution would also foul our water, including stirring up toxic waste during the construction process," the group added. "The project would especially hurt people on the Rockaways, a majority African American community, where it would terminate."
BREAKING: Hochul just did Trump’s bidding by approving the massive Williams fracked gas pipeline.Hochul’s dirty deal with Trump will jack up our utility bills, pollute our air & water, and cook the climate.Join us at 3:30 outside her office 919 3rd Avenue to protest TODAY.
— New York Communities for Change (@nychange.bsky.social) November 7, 2025 at 9:22 AM
However, Williams Companies, the group behind the project, filed a new application this year amid pressure from President Donald Trump for Hochul to green-light construction.
“Today’s decision by New York is a complete reversal of their two previous determinations to reject this pipeline project over threats to the state’s water resources," Mark Izeman, senior attorney for environmental health at the Natural Resources Defense Counsel, said in a statement Friday.
"The pipeline proposal is exactly the same, and state and federal law is the same, so there is no legal or scientific basis for taking a 180 degree turn from the state’s past denials," Izeman continued. "If built, the pipeline would tear up 23 miles of the New York-New Jersey Harbor floor; destroy marine habitats; and dredge up mercury, copper, PCBs, and other toxins."
The project "would also harm sensitive shellfish beds and fishing areas, and undercut billions of dollars New York has invested to improve water quality in the harbor," he added.
Earthjustice New York policy advocate Liz Moran said that “it is shameful that Gov. Hochul and her Department of Environmental Conservation made a decision that fails to protect New Yorkers and our precious waterways."
"We are reviewing the certificate and evaluating our options," Moran added. "The certificate application hasn’t changed since being previously rejected by the DEC, water quality standards haven’t changed—only the political context has changed, and that’s not a basis to completely reverse course.”
Sane Energy Project director Kim Fraczek also condemned the approval, asserting that "under Gov. Hochul’s leadership, New Yorkers’ voices were silenced to appease President Trump’s fossil fuel priorities."
"Hochul has made it abundantly clear that she will abdicate her responsibility as governor, violate New York’s signature climate law, dismiss the environmental and affordability struggles facing New Yorkers, and bend the knee to Trump for political expediency," Fraczek added.
Roger Downs, conservation director at the Sierra Club’s Atlantic chapter, said, "It is truly a sad day when New York leaders cave to the Trump administration and agree to build pipelines that New Yorkers do not need and cannot afford."
“This decision is an affront to clean water, energy affordability, and a stable climate," Downs added.
Food & Water Watch New York state director Laura Shindell called Hochul's approval "a betrayal of New Yorkers."
“In granting the certification for this pipeline, Gov. Hochul has not only sided with Trump, she’s fast-tracked his agenda," she continued. "Hochul has shown New Yorkers she’d prefer to do Trump’s dirty work rather than protect our waterways from pollution."
"She hasn’t kept her promises to fight against skyrocketing energy bills or the climate crisis," Shindell added. "But New Yorkers will fight Hochul’s dirty pipeline every step of the way—alongside our communities—until it is stopped for good.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Fighting Together for Life, Water, and Land: From Line 5 to Gaza
The deep connections between Line 5 and Gaza serve as a stark reminder of the urgent need for united, organized resistance to defend justice, the land, and human and nonhuman life.
Jul 17, 2025
In the United States, we are fighting a rapid descent into authoritarianism that is already having disastrous consequences for people, communities, and the environment. At the same time, grassroots movements across the globe are fighting to defend life, water, and land. These fights may seem worlds apart, but they are in fact intertwined at their roots. Here we will explore two examples that are not unique, but have been chosen because they make visible the underlying structural and political forces that link seemingly disparate struggles across the world. We believe that recognizing these links is necessary for building the powerful coalitions we need to resist in these critical times.
In Wisconsin, the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa—a sovereign Indigenous nation—is leading a battle that resonates far beyond its borders. In coalition with local, national, and international organizations and activists, the Band is saying no to the exploitation of its land and people by fossil fuel giants; saying no to pipelines that endanger waterways, wetlands, and wild rice beds essential to their culture and survival; and saying no to fossil fuel extraction that accelerates the climate crisis.
At the heart of this struggle lies Enbridge’s Line 5—a 645-mile pipeline transporting crude oil and natural gas liquids from Wisconsin to Ontario. Line 5 does not stand alone but is linked to a much larger network of pipelines that begin in the tar sands fields of Canada and transport one of the dirtiest forms of fossil fuel. The aging Line 5 cuts directly through the Bad River Band’s reservation, but easements for this pipeline expired in 2013. Enbridge now plans to reroute the pipeline around the reservation despite years of legal battles and overwhelming public opposition. Enbridge has a well-documented history of spills and environmental destruction and, as an investor in the Dakota Access Pipeline, supported the violent attacks on Indigenous activists at Standing Rock. Enbridge’s reroute of Line 5 remains a direct threat to fragile ecosystems and Indigenous sovereignty.
At the same time, thousands of miles away, millions of Palestinians are being displaced and tens of thousands killed by an all-out military assault in Gaza that targets the entire population and infrastructure for life. This is accompanied by accelerating state-supported violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians in the West Bank. The relentless bombings, mass displacement, deliberate starvation, and destruction of civilian life carried out by Israel and the U.S. against the Palestinian people amounts not to a conventional war but to genocide. The U.S. and Israel are now openly discussing a plan to permanently remove Palestinians and take over Gaza and the West Bank, completing a process of ethnic cleansing that has been ongoing for over 100 years.
What links a battle over a pipeline in Wisconsin to the crisis in Gaza and the West Bank? Everything. The fight against Line 5 isn’t merely about fossil fuels—it’s a stand against a global system of colonialism, militarism, and capitalism that drives the climate crisis. The ethnic cleansing and genocide directed at Palestinians represent the advancement of a long-term colonial project that uses violence and militarism to secure access to land and resources. In a critical moment when we face a rising tide of fascism in the U.S. and abroad, the deep connections between Line 5 and Gaza serve as a stark reminder of the urgent need for united, organized resistance to defend justice, the land, and human and nonhuman life.
Colonialism and Control: From Wisconsin to Gaza
Colonialism is about dominance and control. Whether imposed on Indigenous nations in the United States or on Palestinians abroad, its purpose is to grant powerful states and corporations unfettered access to land and resources, fueling profits and increased power for ruling elites.
In Gaza—and increasingly in the West Bank, southern Lebanon, and Syria—the brutal legacy of settler colonialism is on display. Since at least 1947, Israel has pursued colonization in Palestine, displacing native inhabitants and instituting an apartheid system to control those who remain. Military force and state-sponsored violence have systematically stripped Palestinians of their land, water, property, and freedom, a process bolstered by political, financial, and military support from Western powers. In particular, Israel is critical to strategic U.S. military and political presence in the Middle East; in other words, it is central to U.S. imperialism. The current crisis in Gaza is an escalation of this long-term project.
Climate justice movements in the U.S. must recognize not only the moral imperative but the strategic necessity of centering struggles for immigrant rights, Indigenous and Palestinian sovereignty, and struggles against militarism and fascism.
The systems at work in Gaza are the same as those that drive projects like Line 5. The history of the U.S. is one of colonial expansion, of violently appropriating land and resources from native inhabitants and transferring it to the U.S. government and settlers. Even now, the U.S. government and powerful corporate interests ignore the rights of Indigenous sovereign nations and ram through pipelines, mines, and other projects despite their environmental and social dangers and opposition from tribes. Projects like Line 5 are a continuation of a multi-century colonial project that stretches from from the Indian Wars in the 19th century to the militarized response to the Indigenous-led resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline at Standing Rock.
Whether it manifests through violent repression of protest or the displacement of entire ethnic groups, the same colonial logic is at work. Israel’s occupation and blockade of Gaza aims to secure access to land, water, and offshore natural gas reserves for themselves and their corporate and political allies. The same drive for control and access to resources underpins Line 5, linking these two struggles in a broader fight against colonialism, exploitation, and global corporate power.
Militarism, Capitalism, and Global Solidarity
Militarism fuels colonialism. It is also essential to the fossil fuel industry, the core driver of the climate crisis. The U.S. military extends across an estimated 750 overseas bases in 80 countries. This web of influence props up transnational fossil fuel networks that depend on protection and the threat of force to extract and transport oil and gas around the globe. The paramilitary response to activists protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline and Line 3 in Minnesota are local examples that illustrate this relationship. The U.S. invests $800 billion into the military each year, money that could be spent on the public good but is instead used to underwrite a global system of extraction and exploitation.
The U.S. military also contributes to the climate crisis in more direct ways. The U.S. Department of Defense is the world’s largest institutional consumer of fossil fuels and is responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than many nations. Wars and conflict contribute significantly to carbon emissions and also drive widespread environmental devastation that destroys local livelihoods. U.S. military bases are ranked as among the most polluted in the world, damaging land and water in surrounding areas with past nuclear testing and toxic chemicals.
Militarism is also deeply intertwined with corporate interests. Big defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Oshkosh Defense, and Raytheon profit from the devastation in Gaza. Such contractors are also deeply intertwined with private security firms like Blackrock. These security firms are deployed by fossil fuel companies to protect fossil fuel infrastructure projects like Line 5, harming Indigenous communities and intensifying climate collapse. In short, the U.S. military reinforces a system that prizes profit over human life.
The struggles in Gaza and against Line 5 are two sides of the same coin. Palestinians resisting occupation and Indigenous nations opposing pipelines face the same force: militarized, transnational government-corporate alliances. Their fight is not solely for their own physical and cultural survival—it is a battle for justice and freedom for all people and the planet.
Climate Chaos, Fascism, and Migration
The climate crisis is inseparable from the forces of militarism, colonialism, and capitalism. Climate change is also contributing to a related crisis—the rise of fascism and the demonization of immigrants.
As global temperatures climb, environmental disasters and unpredictability increase, contributing to economic destabilization and a general sense of uncertainty and fear. This creates an ideal breeding ground for fascist ideologies that promise greater security (for some) through the exercise of state control, brute strength, and the scapegoating of the vulnerable—all while siphoning money and power to corporations. Climate change also drives the displacement of people, as extreme heat, flooding, drought, and other environmental disasters force entire regions into unlivable conditions. In 2022 alone, over 43 million people were displaced by climate-related events, from hurricanes and floods to shifts in agricultural viability. This number is set to grow, creating an ever-growing wave of climate refugees.
Indigenous and Palestinian struggles confront the same systems that aim to strengthen corporate and elite interests at the expense of everyday people and vulnerable populations, further deepening global inequality.
Rather than addressing the root causes of climate change, developing plans for adaptation that serve the public good, or offering refuge to those forced to migrate, many governments worldwide are responding with authoritarian measures. Fascist leaders paint climate refugees as threats, blaming migrants and marginalized communities for crises they did not create. In the U.S., we see this in the criminalization of immigration, mass deportation, the expansion of border walls, and the deployment of surveillance technologies—many of which were first developed in Israel and tested on Palestinians. These policies only worsen human suffering while deflecting attention from the real culprits: fossil fuel corporations, militarism, and capitalist greed.
These rising authoritarian impulses are deeply linked to the fight against Line 5 and resistance to Israel’s expansion. Indigenous and Palestinian struggles confront the same systems that aim to strengthen corporate and elite interests at the expense of everyday people and vulnerable populations, further deepening global inequality.
A Call to Action: Building Power to Fight Back
The November 2024 election and turn toward fascism in the U.S. have underscored the urgency of grassroots resistance. Corporate and right-wing forces are aligning in unprecedented ways, fueled by economic inequality, xenophobia, fear, and disinformation. Authoritarian regimes in the U.S. and abroad, including Israel, are poised to further expand corporate power, fossil fuel extraction, militarism, and state oppression in frightening ways. This convergence poses an escalating threat to human communities and the natural world.
The fight against Line 5, led by the Bad River Band, and the global solidarity movement for Palestine both stand at the forefront of grassroots resistance to these converging forces. Broadening our lens, we can see such resistance taking place all over the world: in the anti-pipeline struggles in East Africa, the efforts of Indigenous communities in the Amazon to protect their land and way of life, and the bravery of anti-mining activists in El Salvador, to name just a few examples. These movements remind us that these battles in specific places are part of a broader struggle against interconnected systems of oppression—something that has long been recognized by local communities and Indigenous-led organizations worldwide.
Our organizing must be both intersectional and international. We must connect struggles that have too often been treated in isolation. The same forces that drive the expansion of Line 5 and the attacks on Palestinian life are at work in militarized occupations and conflicts abroad, the construction of border walls and the criminalization of migrants, and the climate crisis itself. By challenging these forces at home, and acting in solidarity with those abroad, we strike at the roots of a global system of exploitation and oppression.
Climate justice movements in the U.S. must recognize not only the moral imperative but the strategic necessity of centering struggles for immigrant rights, Indigenous and Palestinian sovereignty, and struggles against militarism and fascism. We must forge alliances with diverse movements from Wisconsin to East Africa to the Philippines, recognizing that we succeed or fail together. Despite these dangerous and difficult times, a different world is possible when we unite and act as one.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Is the Mountain Valley Pipeline Safe? We Who Live in Its Blast Zone Need Answers
If the allegations contained in a lawsuit are true, it demonstrates a willful endangerment of citizens and a gross violation of federal laws and policies.
Jun 18, 2025
In late 2014 people across West Virginia and southwest Virginia were informed that a collaboration of energy companies had created a limited liability company called Mountain Valley Pipeline LLC. The company was created to develop the Mountain Valley Pipeline, a 303-mile methane-gas pipeline traveling through West Virginia and Virginia mountains, farms, streams, and communities. It is most commonly called the “MVP.” It crossed my organic farm and many places where I travel, work, and play.
From the beginning there were questions about the necessity and the viability of this project. What transpired is a years-long battle to stop the pipeline. By 2022 it was apparent that the MVP was a doomed project, having gone from a price tag of $3.5 billion to over $8 billion and not being able to legally obtain critical permits. It is now projected to eventually cost nearly $10 billion.
The pipeline was rescued in 2023 by then-West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin when he held the debt ceiling legislation hostage until he got his “Dirty Deal,” inserted into the final Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023. This then created a situation where degraded and corroded pipe, which had sat in the sun for years beyond the manufacturer’s recommendations, was going to be buried by MVP developers. Despite warnings from citizens, environmental, and safety experts, MVP was allowed to use much of this expired pipe.
Congress, PHMSA, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) each must conduct investigations to determine if public safety has been compromised and if officials with MVP broke federal law.
In October of 2023 citizens did get the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) to issue additional safety procedures for any of the pipe remaining to be installed across West Virginia and Virginia. Meanwhile MVP was barreling full steam ahead, installing the pipe in some of the most difficult and environmentally sensitive areas of the route. They worked around the clock in sometimes brutal conditions from early June 2023 through June of 2024, despite the fact that Sen. Manchin and others said it could be completed in as little as four months. More lies and deception from those advocating for the pipeline.
Throughout this time, citizens monitoring the construction would hear rumors of shortcuts and pipeline failures like the one that happened in Bent Mountain, Virginia in May of 2024 just days before the pipeline was given the green light to enter service.
In my community of West Virginia, I heard rumors of pipeline being buried that was not properly approved by inspectors, but I heard nothing more about this after January of 2024 when MVP left my farm. That was until June 4 when I read a story by Mike Tony of the Charleston-Gazette-Mail. The story revealed that a wrongful termination lawsuit had been filed in Monroe County, where I live, in April of 2025. It was recently moved to the federal Court in nearby Bluefield, West Virginia. Subsequent stories by Laurence Hammack of The Roanoke Times and by Carlos Anchondo of E&E News have raised dire concerns among those of us who live in the blast zone of the MVP pipeline in West Virginia and Virginia.
The lawsuit alleged that a pipeline inspector was fired by MVP after refusing to sign off on pipe and/or welds he felt were unsafe. In fact, according to the filing in the Monroe County Court, he was told that if he wanted to keep his job, he was to bury the pipe. He refused, and, according to the complaint, he was transferred and later fired. In my eyes, this man is a public hero. He did his job and was fired for it. I wonder how prevalent this kind of excessive pressure is on those doing this job across the pipeline industry.
If the allegations contained in the lawsuit are true, it demonstrates a willful endangerment of citizens and a gross violation of federal laws and policies. It is imperative that this does not get swept under the rug by Mountain Valley Pipeline with some sort of out of court settlement and a nondisclosure agreement. Congress, PHMSA, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) each must conduct investigations to determine if public safety has been compromised and if officials with MVP broke federal law.
This is particularly troubling for me as I suspect that some of the pipe and welds in question are near my home or in other places where I frequent often. I also suspect this is not a situation that is isolated to just Monroe County, West Virginia. This week I will be in Washington D.C. seeking answers from FERC, PHMSA, and our elected officials.
Keep ReadingShow Less
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 told The 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
Palestinians Launch Legal Action Against BP for Fueling Israel's War on Gaza
"By facilitating the transport of oil that fuels military operations in Gaza, BP has contributed to the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in the region," said the director of the organization backing the claimants.
Dec 23, 2024
A group of Palestinians whose family members have been killed in Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip over the past 14 months have initiated legal action in the United Kingdom against the British fossil fuel giant BP, arguing the company is aiding the assault on the enclave via its ownership of a pipeline that provides Israel with crude oil.
In a 36-page letter before claim, the group contends that BP's role in supplying oil to Israel violates the company's stated commitments to human rights, including its expressed support for the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
"Israel relies heavily on crude oil and refined petroleum imports to run its large fleet of fighter jets, tanks, and other military vehicles and operations, as well as the bulldozers implicated in clearing Palestinian homes and olive groves to make way for unlawful Israeli settlements," the letter notes. "Some fuel from refineries goes directly to the armed forces, while much of the rest appears to go to ordinary gas stations where military personnel can refuel their vehicles under a government contract."
The group demands from BP an "immediate cessation of oil supply to Israel and facilitation through" the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline as well as an "admission liability and a commitment to mediation for assessing damages."
"Our clients seek justice for the profound suffering and loss they have endured and call on BP to act responsibly by immediately halting its involvement."
Tayab Ali, head of international law at Bindmans LLP and director of the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP)—which is supporting the group of claimants—said in a statement Monday that "this legal action marks a new phase in accountability for those that are complicit in alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity."
"The evidence against BP demonstrates a clear failure to adhere to its own human rights policies and international law," said Ali. "By facilitating the transport of oil that fuels military operations in Gaza, BP has contributed to the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in the region. Our clients seek justice for the profound suffering and loss they have endured and call on BP to act responsibly by immediately halting its involvement."
According to ICJP, the claimants include "a British citizen of Palestinian origin who lost 16 family members to Israeli airstrikes," "a second British Palestinian claimant whose relatives in Gaza have suffered fatalities and displacement," and "additional claimants who have endured catastrophic physical and psychological harm including amputations and loss of family members."
The group sent its legal letter just over a month after a coalition of environmental groups published a report identifying BP as one of the "top corporate suppliers of oil to Israel."
"The major international oil companies, including BP, Chevron, Eni, ExxonMobil, Shell, and TotalEnergies, may be linked to 35% of
the crude oil supplied to Israel since October [2023]," the report states. "These companies, as well as state-owned entities and other private and publicly traded oil producers, profit from supplying oil to Israel's refineries, where a proportion is likely refined into fuels for Israel's war machine."
Last week, the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations argued that "foreign governments have an obligation" under international law "to end the supply of fuel to Israel unless they can guarantee it will only be used for nonmilitary purposes."
"This includes both a ban on the export of crude oil, military jet fuel, and other fuels, as well as a prohibition on the transport of these commodities through their territory," the group said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy