Rio Grande LNG wants to build the largest and most polluting methane gas processing facility in the country in one of the poorest communities in the US, the Rio Grande Valley of Texas. In February, the widely opposed Rio Grande LNG project announced plans to expand the size, scale, and amount of methane gas it would process at the not-yet-operational facility proposed for the Port of Brownsville, Texas. The expansion proposal includes applying for a permit that if granted would almost double the size of the facility, and include an additional three liquefaction units (or “Trains”) that would process and export 2.4 billion cubic feet per day (bcf/d) of flammable methane gas. Rio Grande Valley residents and organizations have continued to vocalize their opposition to this LNG facility. On the same day the LNG corporation announced their plans to expand to their shareholders, local community members protested against Rio Grande LNG’s presence in and sponsorship of the Charro Days cultural parade in downtown Brownsville, TX. Rio Grande Valley community members opposed the LNG corporate sponsorship by displaying a striking illuminated banner that read, “Stop ICE, LNG, & SpaceX!” during Friday’s Charro Days night-time parade. Here’s a video of the night-time protest. Community members also distributed and held up anti-LNG signs to parade attendees during the Saturday Charro Days International Day parade.
Community members have a right to be angry at the City of Brownsville for supporting Rio Grande LNG and allowing the company to sponsor the Charro Days parade and other community events. Rio Grande LNG has been bulldozing pristine land since 2022 despite having its permit sent back to be reexamined by the regulator, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The permit for Rio Grande LNG and two other proposed methane gas projects in the region, Texas LNG and the Rio Bravo pipeline, were sent back to the regulator due to a lawsuit victory last August by members of the South Texas Environmental Justice Network, the City of Port Isabel, the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe, Vecinos para el bienestar de la comunidad costera group, and the Sierra Club. If Rio Grande LNG, Texas LNG, and Rio Bravo Pipeline projects continue to move forward and begin operation, they will be the biggest contributor of cancer-causing and climate change-inducing emissions in the Rio Grande Valley region. This low-income region is primarily Brown people with poor access to health care. The two LNG facilities would include flammable pipelines, ground flares, eight storage tanks up to 19 stories tall for storing methane gas, and the development of a fossil fuel industrial infrastructure spanning nearly two thousand acres located near the H-E-B grocery store in Port Isabel, TX. The pristine land where Rio Grande LNG and Texas LNG plan to operate is also sacred to the Carrizo Comecrudo Tribe of Texas. The Tribe has never been consulted by the LNG companies, regulatory agencies, and other bad actors regarding the LNG projects.
Construction of the Rio Grande LNG, Texas LNG, and Rio Bravo Pipeline projects has been delayed for many years due to ongoing legal and permitting challenges and protests from the Rio Grande Valley community. However, the companies do not relent in their struggle to obtain customers for their gas, as well as financial support for their project. For years, Rio Grande Valley-based community organizations have taken legal action to prevent the pollution the proposed project would emit into their environment and neighborhoods. A victory by the Vecinos para el bienestar de la comunidad costera group resulted in the initial downsizing of the size of the Rio Grande LNG facility to five liquefaction units. Rio Grande LNG’s current expansion plans include eight liquefaction units that would not only cause an even larger unnecessary risk of pollution to the area, but would damage the health and safety of the low-income and Tribal communities in the Rio Grande Valley and the senstitive, protected, unique wildlife ecosystems of the region.
“The LNGs, the regulators, the politicians in Brownsville and Cameron County, and the banks have never consulted with the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe about their plans to bulldoze lands and destroy sacred sites with villages and burial grounds like “Garcia Pasture,” that is sacred to us,” said Juan Mancias, Tribal Chairman for the Carrizo Comecrudo Tribe. “These Brownsville and Cameron County politicians use Native people like us as their ornaments on their football teams and in the Brownsville Stillman Museum, but then they ignore us, support the desecration of our history, and the killing of our people with toxic pollution. The colonizer cannot erase the environment or dehumanize what they don’t understand because it does not look like them or make them comfortable. This attitude of misunderstanding and dehumanizing promotes the genocide this country is founded on. The Carrizo Comecrudo Tribe’s people are not going away. We will fight these polluters.”
Rio Grande LNG and Texas LNG’s Negative Impact on Climate Change
If allowed to continue moving forward, Rio Grande LNG would be the biggest single-source emitter of toxic pollution and greenhouse gas emissions in the Rio Grande Valley region which is also terrible for the climate. If Rio Grande LNG submits a permit application for its expansion and receives approval, the Sierra Club estimates that the destructive impact to climate change of the Rio Grande LNG facility project would be equivalent to that of 83 coal plants or over 72 million cars per year. See table:
| Rio Grande LNG Project Liquefaction units or “Trains” | Project Capacity | Lifecycle Greenhouse gas Emissions (MMT CO2e/yr) | Emissions Equivalent: Coal Plants | Emissions Equivalent: Gasoline-Powered Cars |
| Trains 1-5 (Phase I & II) | 3.7 bcf/d | 191 | 50 | 44,602,773 |
| Train 6 | 0.8 bcf/d | 41.6 | 11 | 9,718,411 |
| Trains 7-8 | 1.6 bcf/d | 83.2 | 22 | 19,436,823 |
If Texas LNG is built, the Sierra Club estimates that the facility would have a climate change impact of more than 8 coal plants or more than 7 million cars per year. See table:
| Texas LNG Liquefaction units or “Trains” | Project Capacity | Lifecycle Greenhouse gas Emissions (MMT CO2e/yr) | Emissions Equivalent: Coal Plants | Emissions Equivalent: Gasoline-Powered Cars |
| Trains 1-2 | 0.5 bcf/d | 31.75 MMT CO2e/yr | 8.4 coal plants | 7,400,000 |
Rio Grande LNG and Texas LNG plan to release additional pollutants, including volatile organic compounds, sulfur dioxides, particulate matter, and other harmful emissions. Residents and organizations in the Rio Grande Valley along with attorneys and national allies are continuing to raise concerns about the environmental and health impacts these facilities would create. They have been sending letters and petitions to the funders and banks supporting these projects urging them to withdraw their investments in the LNG projects. Some of these investors, such as Global Infrastructure Partners and BlackRock, have contributed millions of dollars to finance the Rio Grande LNG project.
“Besides violations of Indigenous rights and serious environmental impacts, the financial risks to investors of Global Infrastructure Partners’ and BlackRock’s Rio Grande LNG are mounting as the project faces growing headwinds,” said Ryan Leitner, Senior Campaign Coordinator with Private Equity Stakeholder Project. “Project delays, loss of investing support, revoked permits, and unmitigated environmental harms all create uncertainty for the billions in public employee retirement money used to finance this terminal. We are concerned for the institutional investors exposed to this LNG project. Pension fund managers should address their financial risks and urge Global Infrastructure Partners and BlackRock to halt the build-out of Rio Grande LNG.”
The LNG projects present significant risks not only from harmful pollutants but also from explosion and safety hazards due to the lack of regulation in the LNG industry. It has been documented that operations at SpaceX have resulted in flammable rocket debris being dumped on the proposed LNG sites and have caused seismic activity felt over 20 miles away. These LNG projects are proposed to operate approximately 6 miles from the SpaceX launch pad. Community organizations and their lawyers have sent letters and requests for safety risk analysis of LNG and SpaceX to the regulatory agencies responsible for both projects: the Federal Aviation Administration and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Alarmingly , neither agency has responded to these requests for safety studies.
“Rio Grande LNG has not consulted or secured the consent of the Carrizo Comecrudo Tribe of Texas. They have not considered the community health or environmental impact to the area. This project does not have the appropriate emergency response planning needed for an industry that is in such close proximity to the SpaceX’s giant rocket launches and explosions. Enough is enough. It’s time to close the chapter on this project before a disaster happens, ” said Ruth Breech with Rainforest Action Network.
In response to robust local opposition, the Rio Grande LNG company has formed a corporate partnership with the City of Brownsville and the Mayor to undermine the opposition by the City of Port Isabel, South Padre Island, Laguna Vista, residents of Laguna Heights and Long Island Village. Brownsville Mayor Cowen has turned his back on directly impacted residents, has actively promoted Rio Grande LNG events on his Facebook page, and has allowed Rio Grande LNG to sponsor his State of the City Address on March 26. Organizations and residents of the Rio Grande Valley represented by about 80 people protested against the Rio Grande LNG sponsorship and the City’s partnership with SpaceX outside the State of the City Address event.
Status of the LNG Projects in the Rio Grande Valley
Several announcements and updates have been made on the status of the three LNG projects proposed for the region. Rio Grande LNG persists in its plans to expand, and the LNG companies have appealed the community’s lawsuit victory. The court’s response to the appeal was to unjustly allow the Rio Grande LNG company to continue building and keep their permits while the regulatory agency, FERC, continues to review the flaws with the LNG permits.
“The court did not change its conclusion that FERC broke the law by reauthorizing the projects without a supplemental environmental impact statement, and by failing to fully address concerns about impacts on surrounding communities. We are disappointed in the court’s decision to allow the permits to remain in place despite FERC’s illegal actions. But once FERC reexamines the projects, the facts should compel them to conclude that the projects should not be approved at all, or should be modified to reduce harmful impacts. Ultimately, these projects should not be completed,” said Sierra Club Attorney Nathan Matthews, representing the City of Port Isabel, Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe, and other Rio Grande Valley community members.
Meanwhile, community organizations and residents will continue speaking up about LNG and SpaceX’s devastation in South Texas.
You must be logged in to post a comment.