Environmental Groups and South Texas Residents Tell FERC to Deny Rio Grande LNG’s Extension Request

Brownsville, TX - Yesterday, a group of environmental and community advocacy groups, including the City of Port Isabel, Esto’k Gna Tribal Nation of Texas, Healthy Gulf, Public Citizen, Sierra Club, and Vecinos para el Bienestar de la Comunidad Costera, filed a motion to intervene to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), in an extension request from Rio Grande LNG, a fracked gas terminal proposed for the Gulf Coast. Just earlier this month, Rio Grande LNG requested an extension from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the facility to come online in 2028. Rio Grande LNG was initially expecting to be operational by 2026. 

This is the second delay Rio Grande LNG has faced in 2022 alone and could face more. In January, NextDecade, the company behind Rio Grande LNG announced that their final investment decision (FID) would be delayed until the second half of this year, though FID was initially expected in 2019. However, Rio Grande LNG currently only has three customers lined-up, which is not enough to reach partial FID by the end of the year.

Rio Grande LNG attempted to justify this most recent delay  with concerns about European gas supply which has been impacted by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. However, even if Rio Grande LNG was on schedule, it would not be able to provide gas to Europe in the short term. It takes years to build new facilities and no new gas infrastructure is actually needed to supply Europe with gas from the US. 

If built, Rio Grande LNG and the associated Rio Bravo pipeline would pollute low-income and Latinx communities of the Rio Grande Valley region, harm the local shrimping and fishing industry, irreparably damage the Laguna Atascosa wildlife refuge, threaten numerous endangered species like the ocelot, and destroy pristine lands sacred to the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of South Texas. Rio Grande LNG never consulted with the Tribe, who opposes the project. For the last seven years, the project has faced significant local opposition, as well as ongoing legal challenges including an active lawsuit challenging the Clean Water Act permit for the facility, as well as a recent court ruling forcing federal regulators to redo their analysis of Rio Grande LNG’s climate and environmental justice impacts. 

Juan Mancias, Chairman of the Carrizo Comecrduo Tribe of Texas, issued the following statement:

"Rio Grande LNG and Texas LNG have kept the Carrizo Comecrudo Tribe of Texas from accessing the land and offering their prayers. We want the LNG companies to leave our homelands. We want FERC to do their due diligence, deny the extension request, and immediately cancel the Rio Grande LNG project once and for all." 

In response, Sierra Club Brownsville Organizer Emma Guevara released the following statement: 

“Rio Grande LNG and the other fracked gas export facility, Texas LNG, would devastate our local nature tourism and fishing economy, subject our families to dangerous pollution, and worsen the climate crisis. These LNG projects are on shaky ground, both legally and financially, and the opposition to gas exports isn’t going anywhere. More delays are inevitable. We will continue to fight to ensure that this project is never built. FERC needs to listen to our community which has made it clear they do not want LNG, and oppose this disastrous project once and for all.”

Tom Gosselin, attorney with Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels Campaign, issued the following statement: 

“The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission must deny Rio Grande LNG’s request because Rio Grande LNG has not provided a satisfactory reason for the extension and FERC’s initial analyses are now stale. Rio Grande LNG’s request is misleading because this project is not likely to be completed in 2028 either. Construction will take at least a full six years. Rio Grande LNG is still waiting for several other FERC approvals and analyses. It is still the subject of active litigation. And, it still faces widespread community opposition and condemnation. It stands to reason that additional challenges and delays are forthcoming. FERC should do the right thing and deny this request. It’s time to bring this to an end. There is no point in approving a fiscally tenuous, super-polluting project that is unlikely to ever come to fruition.”