Australia-based energy firm Woodside announced Monday plans to invest $17 billion in a new liquefied natural gas export facility to be sited in south Louisiana. Company CEO and Managing Director Meg O’Neill said the Louisiana LNG facility represents the single largest greenfield energy project investment, and the largest foreign direct investment in the state’s history.
In a release, the company said the project will support 15,000 jobs during the construction phase and, when completed, will sport a total export capacity of more than 27 million tons per annum of LNG. Originally named the Driftwood LNG project by previous owner Tellurian, Woodside acquired the project in 2024 for just $900 million.
The timing of Woodside’s announcement on Monday, which represented the 99th day of President Donald Trump’s second administration, serves to symbolize the impressive success the President and his senior appointees have had in completely changing the energy and climate policy debate in the U.S. across their first 100 days. Nowhere has this sea change in policy been more obvious than as it relates to the LNG export industry.
When Trump was sworn into office on January 20, America’s LNG sector had spent the previous 358 days as a target of demonization by former President Joe Biden and his senior officials. That stemmed from the decision by the White House to implement a so-called “pause” in permitting of new LNG facilities like Louisiana LNG on January 27 last year. Prior to last November’s election, that pause appeared destined to become a permanent feature of federal policy had Kamala Harris won the presidency.
President Trump canceled the Biden pause with a Day 1 executive order, and the industry has since resumed the pace of rapid expansion that had made it one of America’s great growth industries prior to Biden’s irrational move last year.
The resumption of the LNG industry’s rapid growth path is just one of many success stories which Trump’s energy team of Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Energy Secretary Chris Wright, and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin can point to at the end of this first 100 days time period.
At Interior, Secretary Burgum can point to his efforts to return the federal oil and gas leasing program to normal order both onshore and offshore after four years of its being held hostage by Biden’s Interior Secretary Deb Haaland. He can also highlight last week’s announcement detailing efforts to speed up permitting approvals related requirements under the Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act.
Zeldin is able to point to his effort to freeze $20 billion in highly questionable grants awarded by his predecessor, Michael Regan, during the final days of the Biden presidency, and claw them back a major savings. He has also embarked on a study focused on the potential reversal of the Obama EPA’s endangerment finding on greenhouse gases, a finding that classifies carbon dioxide, the fundamental building block for all life on Planet Earth, as a pollutant which can be regulated under the Clean Air Act. A successful reversal of that finding could lead to the restoration of honesty in air quality regulation and a focus on elimination of real pollution, which was the intent of the law as it was passed by congress.
Secretary Wright has less ability to directly impact regulatory polices to the nature of his job, but he has become the most effective spokesman for commonsense energy policies to ever hold the Energy Secretary position. He has not shied away from taking on controversial topics, like the need to revitalize the nation’s coal industry to take advantage of America’s enormous wealth of that resource. Wright has also been very blunt and effective in highlighting the role the wind industry has played in forcing consumer utility costs up to all-time highs under the Biden administration.
Taken as a whole, it is hard to imagine a more impactful 100 days related to energy and climate policy than this administration has achieved. Trump’s legion of critics won’t agree with the direction he and his appointees have taken, but they can’t honestly claim they aren’t producing major results. For Trump and his team, it is a simple case of promises made, promises kept.
David Blackmon is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, an energy writer, and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will no longer penalize Arizona and other states for foreign air pollution affecting state levels.
The EPA decision follows local and statewide efforts by Arizona’s elected and grassroots leaders in recent years to toss this regulation.
Among those engaging with the EPA was the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC). The grassroots organization’s president, Scot Mussi, commended the EPA decision.
“Due to this regulation from the Biden Administration, Arizona was being forced to adopt radical control measures, like banning gasoline-powered vehicles, which still would have left our state short of meeting the ozone standard,” said Mussi. “Yet again, the left’s environmental policies have proven to be disastrous and unworkable. For the good of our state and country, we must never repeat these mandates.”
🚨 EPA Delivers Big Win for Arizona
Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would be reversing the Biden Administration’s Guidance on the Preparation of Clean Air Act Section (CAA) 179B Demonstrations for Nonattainment Areas Affected by International…
— Arizona Free Enterprise Club (@azfec) April 8, 2025
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced on Monday it would rescind the Guidance on the Preparation of Clean Air Act Section (CAA) 179B Demonstrations for Nonattainment Areas Affected by International Transport of Emissions.
The EPA published a press release, also on Monday, detailing the changes to air pollution regulations. The rescinded guidance effectively penalized states for air pollution caused by other countries.
“This guidance made it unnecessarily difficult for states to demonstrate that foreign air pollution is harming Americans within their borders,” stated the EPA. “States should not be penalized for air pollution beyond their control, including pollution crossing international borders into the United States.”
In a statement, Zeldin said U.S. citizens shouldn’t be held responsible for other nations’ air pollution failures.
“Americans should not be harmed by other countries that do not have the same environmental standards we have in the United States,” said Zeldin. “Not only are we eliminating cumbersome red tape that placed an excessive burden on states to prove emissions were from an international source, but we are also helping states across our nation prosper while ensuring they continue to provide clean air for their residents.”
The EPA said it would work with state and local air agencies to secure regulatory relief under the rescinded guidance.
The guidance emerged in December 2020 during the last month of the first Trump administration. The guidance was intended to assist state, local, and tribal air agencies with developing a demonstration on how a nonattainment area would be able to attain or would have attained relevant National Ambient Air Quality Standard if not for other countries’ air pollution.
Last month, the EPA agreed to reconsider its determination that the Northern Wasatch Front in Utah failed to attain the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
This latest policy change aligns with the Trump administration’s designs for the EPA under Zeldin outlined in his Powering the Great American Comeback initiative. Zeldin declared in his announcement of the initiative that conservation was inherently a core principle of conservatism.
This initiative announced in February proposes five new pillars of guidance for the EPA’s work over the first 100 days and throughout the next four years, all centered around American independence and dominance: securing clean air, land, and water for all Americans; restoring American energy dominance; permitting reform, cooperative federalism, and cross-agency partnership; making the U.S. the artificial intelligence capital of the world; and protecting and bringing back American auto jobs.
In a joint press release issued on Monday, Maricopa County Chairman Thomas Galvin and Supervisor Debbie Lesko said they made the case in a meeting last month with the EPA of the difficulty for states to prove certain air pollution impacts. The stance from current county leadership marks a departure from past leadership, which advanced measures to meet EPA compliance on ozone standards.
“At that meeting, county leadership demonstrated how difficult it has been for states like Arizona to prove the impact of air pollution from international transport, and as a result, we risk more regulation,” said Galvin and Lesko. “As Administrator Zeldin said, today’s announcement is a step in the right direction for states looking to balance the need for clean air with the importance of economic development.”
Galvin and Lesko also thanked Senator Mark Kelly for providing assistance on the issue.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
A bill asking President Trump and Congress to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from imposing sanctions on Arizona is currently making its way through the Arizona legislature.
House Concurrent Memorial (HCM) 2010, sponsored by Rep. Michael Carbone (R-LD25) urges the federal government to prevent the EPA from imposing what lawmakers call “coercive and likely unconstitutional” penalties on Arizona regarding ozone pollution standards. The resolution also calls for maintaining the existing 2015 air quality standard rather than implementing stricter regulations.
The federal Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set and periodically review air quality standards to protect public health. In 2015, the EPA lowered the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ground-level ozone to 70 parts per billion to reduce harmful pollution linked to respiratory illnesses. However, Arizona officials argue that some areas struggle to meet the standard due to factors beyond their control, such as emissions from outside the state or even outside the country.
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) is responsible for implementing and enforcing air quality regulations at the state level. Under federal law, state air quality plans must prevent emissions that significantly contribute to pollution in neighboring states or interfere with visibility protections.
The resolution, if passed, would formally request that:
The President and Congress intervene to stop the EPA from penalizing Arizona for failing to meet ozone standards deemed unattainable with current technology.
The EPA revise its regulations to allow Arizona’s air quality plan to account for cross-border emissions when determining compliance.
The EPA maintain the 2015 ozone standard rather than implement stricter limits that the resolution claims lack sufficient scientific backing.
Additionally, the measure directs the Arizona Secretary of State to send copies of the memorial to federal officials, including the President, congressional leaders, and Arizona’s U.S. Senators and Representatives.
The measure passed the Arizona House with a 32-27-1 vote and was approved by the House Natural Resources, Energy & Water Committee in a 6-4 vote.
Supporters of the resolution argue that Arizona should not be penalized for ozone levels influenced by external sources beyond state control. If approved by the Legislature, HCM 2010 will serve as an official request for federal action but will not carry the force of law.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
When electric vehicle subsidies were introduced around 2010, they were sold as a short-term fix to allow the undeveloped EV market to get its legs and compete with Internal Combustion Engines (ICE). The subsidies were justified on the basis that EVs, emitting no tail pipe emissions, would reduce global warming, later to be known as climate change.
Fifteen years later, far longer than any normal probation period, the experiment has clearly not worked. According to the Expedia Automotive Trend Report, only 7.9% of new car registrations in 2024 were for EVs. Just 9.3% of the 286 million cars on the road were EVs, paltry numbers indeed considering the strenuous efforts of the federal government to stoke their success.
Purchasers of new EVs are provided with a $7,500 federal subsidy, plus state subsidies where available. Used cars can pull down up to $4,000 in purchasing aid. Commercial vehicles over 14,000 pounds can receive $40,000. Home chargers are eligible for $1,000.
Even though the fuels of ICE cars are heavily taxed, the charging stations for EVs are subsidized too. Battery factories get subsidized. Then there is the whole sorry history of boondoggle giveaways subsidizing EV production and failed loans beginning with the notorious Solyndra debacle.
Canoo lost $900 million and produced 122 cars. Taxpayers got stuck with hundreds of millions of dollars in failed loans from Lordstown Motors, which manufactured 56 vehicles total.
EV drivers don’t have to chip in for road construction and maintenance costs, since they don’t pay gas tax or any fuel-based funding source. On the contrary, theirs is heavily subsidized. Their out-of-pocket cost is equivalent to $1.21 per gallon, but direct and indirect subsidies from government and utilities push the true cost to $17.33 per gallon, according to the Heritage Foundation.
EVs require a lot of juice to operate. Even though the EV market has failed to develop as expected, many major utility companies are already struggling to meet the increased demand. They warn that future EV mandates will require greatly expanded infrastructure for electricity generation and charging stations.
The Texas Public Policy Foundation calculates EV cars would cost $48,688 more without the production and purchase subsidies alone. Maybe all this public expense would be justified if EVs substantially reduced hydrocarbon emissions, but they don’t.
These calculations are tricky because net operating emissions obviously depend on the fuels used to produce the electricity. The disappointing failure of solar and wind to supply abundant, reliable energy and our still-limited access to nuclear energy have resulted in fossil fuels producing most of the electricity used to propel these “emission free” cars.
Moreover, the battery manufacturing and disposal processes are intensely energy consuming. Most studies show little, if any, overall benefit from switching to EVs. Yet the overwhelming evidence that EVs cost a ton and do’’t do much good have so far not deterred the ambitions of government and the enviros to force all or most Americans into them.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s greenhouse gas emission standards still require that 32% of new automobile sales be EVs or hybrid by 2027, a fourfold increase in two years from now! By 2032, 70% of sales must be electric. By 2050, we must be emitting no carbon at all.
Here’s a newsflash. That is’’t going to happen. The world’s biggest polluters (China and India) aren’t on board and even in the West, citizens are clearly not willing to crater their economy for a dubious ideological goal with better solutions available.
Meanwhile, government continues mandating that car companies sell EVs to customers who simply do’’t want them even with the massive incentives. What could go wrong?
Companies that can are fleeing the market. Ford projects that it will lose $5.5 billion on EVs this year, which they are forced to produce to meet the EV fleet mandates. That’s $60,000 per car sold, an amount they seemingly anticipate will eventually be bailed out by government.
Look, it’s America. EVs are actually cool and fun to drive. People who want them and can afford them should have them. But there is no reason that the rest of us, who derive no benefit, should have to pay for them.
Let the bubble burst.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
The Trump administration has been hard at work dismantling offices of “environmental justice” in the federal government.
Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it began implementing Trump’s executive order “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing.” The agency placed on leave 171 employees in DEI and environmental justice offices.
The EPA intends to close the Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights, The Washington Post reported. Trump appointees at the Justice Department announced they would restructure the Department of Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.
Shortly after her confirmation, Attorney General Pam Bondi rescinded any “memoranda, guidance, or similar directive that implement the prior administration’s ‘environmental justice’ agenda.”
“Going forward, the Department will evenhandedly enforce all federal civil and criminal laws, including environmental laws,” Bondi noted.
Why does this matter?
“Environmental justice” refers to the toxic brew of critical race theory and climate alarmism. According to critical race theory, America is institutionally racist against black people and other minorities and in favor of white people. According to climate alarmism, the burning of fossil fuels will bring about Armageddon.
The EPA defines “environmental justice” as ensuring that Americans “are fully protected from disproportionate and adverse human health and environmental effects (including risks) and hazards, including those related to climate change, the cumulative impacts of environmental and other burdens, and the legacy of racism or other structural or systemic barriers” (emphasis added).
Trump entered office promising to unleash American energy and reverse the Biden administration’s promotion of critical race theory and its application in the “diversity, equity, and inclusion” movement. This diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) movement aims to promote some racial minorities, rejecting the colorblind approach of focusing on merit or competence.
While President George H.W. Bush established the EPA’s Office of Environmental Equity — the office that President Bill Clinton would later rename the Office of Environmental Justice — President Joe Biden hypercharged its mission, directing all-of-government efforts on DEI, restrictions on fossil fuels, and a promotion of less reliable forms of energy, like wind and solar.
In doing so, Biden followed the demands of activist groups, many of which staffed and advised his administration.
As I note in my book, “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government,” Biden tapped climate alarmists for key leadership positions.
Biden picked Michael Regan, a vice president at the Environmental Defense Fund, to head up the EPA. He selected Laura Daniel-Davis, a vice president at the National Wildlife Federation (NWF), to serve at the Department of the Interior. He nominated Tracey Stone-Manning, another NWF staffer who confessed to typing out a letter on behalf of tree-spiking eco-terrorists, to head the Bureau of Land Management.
Gina McCarthy, who headed EPA under President Barack Obama, became president of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) until Biden appointed her national climate adviser.
When Trump moved against the EPA’s environmental justice office, NRDC released a statement condemning the move as a “disgrace.” Who did NRDC enlist to make the statement? None other than Matthew Tejada, who directed the Office of Environmental Justice from 2013 to 2022.
“The Trump EPA is abandoning the communities across our nation that need help the most,” Tejada said. “Shuttering the environmental justice office will mean more toxic contaminants, dangerous air, and unsafe water in communities across the nation that have been most harmed by pollution in the past.”
That conclusion, of course, relies on the assumptions of critical race theory and climate alarmism, however. If America is not institutionally racist but rather a country with civil rights laws that protect citizens of all races from discrimination, the EPA does not need an “environmental justice” office to combat pollution for Americans of specific skin colors.
If the predictions of climate disaster are overblown and based on false assumptions that exaggerate the risks when actual deaths from climate disaster have declined by 99% over the past century, then perhaps the EPA need not invest extra funds in an office of environmental justice. If fossil fuels have gotten substantially cleaner, perhaps the EPA should focus on specific air quality issues, rather than premonitions of global climate doom.
This seems to be at least part of the reasoning behind EPA’s restructure.
“Under President Trump, the EPA will be focused on our core mission to protect human health and the environment, while Powering the Great American Comeback,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said in a statement Tuesday. “The previous Administration used DEI and Environmental Justice to advance ideological priorities, distributing billions of dollars to organizations in the name of climate equity. This ends now.”
“We will be good stewards of tax dollars and do everything in our power to deliver clean air, land, and water to every American, regardless of race, religion, background, and creed,” he added.
While pollution affects Americans in different ways, the EPA need not indulge in critical race theory and climate alarmism to effectively combat the real threats Americans face. Rather than addressing supposed institutional racism and fossil fuel-induced disaster, the EPA should focus on its actual mission: protecting Americans from concrete instances of pollution and environmental harms.
Of course, those humdrum concerns don’t require as much federal funding and staff — and that might explain the real reason behind the Left’s freakout over Trump’s move.
Tyler O’Neil is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, managing editor of The Daily Signal, and the author of two books: “Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center,” and “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government.”
