(The Center Square) – A federal judge on Monday temporarily blocked the Biden administration's ban on new exports of liquified natural gas exports to non-free trade agreement countries.

Judge James Cain Jr. of the Western District of Louisiana issued a preliminary injunction against the U.S. Department of Energy's partial LNG export ban after more than a dozen states sued, arguing the ban was illegal.

“It appears that the DOE's decision to halt the permit approval process for entities to export LNG to non-FTA countries is completely without reason or logic and is perhaps the epiphany of ideocracy,” Cain wrote in his ruling.

The ban was put in place, according to the Biden administration, because the exports “no longer adequately account for considerations like potential energy cost increases for American consumers and manufacturers beyond current authorizations or the latest assessment of the impact of greenhouse gas emissions.”

After the Department of Energy announced the ban in January, 16 states filed suit, including Louisiana.

“This is great news for Louisiana, our 16 state partners in this fight, and the entire country,” Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said in a statement following the judge's decision. “As Judge Cain mentioned in his ruling, there is roughly $61 billion dollars of pending infrastructure at risk to our state from this illegal pause. LNG has an enormous and positive impact on Louisiana, supplying clean energy for the entire world, and providing good jobs here at home.”

Louisiana was joined by Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming in the lawsuit. 

(The Center Square) — Louisiana voters will cast ballots in November to determine whether the state will participate in a possible royalty system for offshore renewable energy production, but federal action is required before the money starts to flow. 

Over the past several years, bills have been submitted to allow the alternative energy revenues, such as wind leases, to be sent to the Gulf states of Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas to fund coastal restoration and resilience projects.

All of these bills would reform the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act by increasing the revenue-sharing distribution from offshore oil and gas activities from 37.5% to 50% and eliminating the existing state revenue-sharing cap of $375 million for Gulf Coast states.

It's of dire importance to Louisiana as the funds from the BP oil spill settlement, which is the primary source for coastal restoration projects, will run out in 2031. The projects are designed to repair and rebuild the state's wetlands which shield inland areas from hurricane storm surges and provide important nurseries for marine life. 

U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., filed a bill last year called the Reinvesting in Shoreline Economies & Ecosystems Act with U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I. Congressman Steve Scalise, R-La., has a bill called the Budgeting for Renewable Electrical Energy Zone Earnings that he has filed twice in the last two years. U.S. Rep. Lizzie Fletcher, D-Texas, has also filed her version of the measure. 

The National Ocean Industries Association is the trade organization for the offshore industry and supports this type of legislation. President Erik Milito told the Center Square that if the bill becomes law, Louisiana could see $1.96 billion over the next 10 years if the RISEE Act or other similar legislation becomes law.

“Well, it should, over time, you're gonna see more revenue flowing to the government from offshore wind power, and if states are able to share in that then it becomes fairly obvious to the local taxpayers and the local constituency that this much money is now coming into our state because of offshore wind,” Milito said. “You haven't needed that in the Northeast Atlantic, Pacific. Those state governments have taken independent action to promote offshore wind because they're more progressive when it comes to wanting to have you know, climate goals in place. When it comes to the oil and gas sector, you know, the Gulf Coast has been it really for the past several decades.

“And Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama have all been supportive because of the employment base and the investment base that you have along the coastline with hundreds if not thousands of companies contributing to the local economies.”

The bills have bipartisan support, as several environmental groups such as the Citizens Climate Lobby, the Coastal Conservation Association, the National Audubon Society, the National Wildlife Federation and the Environmental Defense Fund among others have weighed in support for the legislation. 

Voters will decide on Nov. 5 whether to add two amendments to the state constitution governing offshore energy royalty distribution. The two bills authored Rep. Joseph Orgeron, R-Cut Off, were signed into law by Gov. Jeff Landry on June 19. Right now, any offshore wind or other renewable revenues would be split between the state's General Fund (75%) and the remainder with the state's mineral fund

House Bill 300 would place a constitutional amendment on the ballot to redirect federal revenues from “generated from Outer Continental Shelf alternative or renewable energy production sources, including wind energy, solar energy, tidal energy, wave energy, geothermal energy, and other alternative or renewable energy production or sources.”

The companion bill, House Bill 305, that would codify the shift of federal royalties to the coastal protection fund from the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act program if the measure is passed by voters.

(The Center Square) — Louisiana officials heard from groups opposed to a taxpayer-funded flood control lake on the Pearl River in Jackson, Mississippi on Tuesday.

The Lower Pearl River Basin Task Force in Louisiana held a hearing to hear about the potential environmental impacts on the project, which a draft environmental impact statement says could cost up to $2.1 billion.   

Andrew Whitehurst, a representative from Healthy Gulf, a program dedicated to preserving the Gulf's natural resources, argued the One Lake Project would adversely affect Pearl River and its habitats through Mississippi and Louisiana. 

According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the river drains an area of 8,760 square miles consisting of all, or parts, of 23 counties in Mississippi and parts of three Louisiana parishes. The Corps is hosting a comment period on the project that will end on July 22. 

Along with three meetings in Mississippi, the Corps will host a meeting in Slidell on July 11 at 11 a.m. at the Slidell Municipal Auditorium. 

A draft environmental impact statement issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on June 7 indicated while that the agency wouldn't support the full One Lake project, it would support other flood control measures that could include a smaller lake. 

The Rankin-Hinds Drainage District, an entity of the state of Mississippi created to prevent flooding in the two counties, supports the project. District officials say the lake would not only prevent flooding in Jackson, but provide an urban waterfront that would increase city revenues and provide recreational opportunities. 

However, Whitehurst says the dredging and damming required to create the lake would cause wetland and wildlife habitat destruction that would be extremely environmentally damaging. 

Whitehurst said the dredging near toxic waste sites might loosen some slurry and leachate down the river system. He also said the lives of multiple turtle and fish species whose habitat near the current banks would be endangered. 

A project to fix the flooding in the area has been in talks for years and the One Lake Project has been working its way through committees and boards since 2011, according to Pearl River Keeper's website, an organization devoted to preserving the Pearl River.

Louisiana lawmakers, representing constituents that could face downstream effects from One Lake, were opposed to this project as recently as 2018. Whitehurst urged the task force to recommend a new statement from the Legislature against the project due to the urgency of its decision. 

“It's desired that this whole process wrap up with a record of decision on this EIS this fall. They're not waiting,” Whitehurst said. 

Whitehurst also suggested that there is not enough economic explanations made to justify the impact to businesses on the river. 

“It's something that they're worried about,” Whitehurst said of those businesses who rely on the river remaining in its original state. “There's not a cost or economic appendix released with this document. That's one of the first things we looked for.”

Healthy Gulf says a combination of levee setbacks to widen a constricted floodplain, plus some improvements to existing levees along with floodplain buyouts could be employed to relieve flooding in Jackson without blocking the channel, destroying habitats or causing flow problems downstream. The Rankin-Hinds Drainage District has opposed this plan, saying it would be too expensive.