The Biden administration recently granted approval for a significant new oil infrastructure project—the Sea Port Oil Terminal—off the coast of Texas, sparking a controversy among environmental advocates who see this decision as a betrayal of the administration’s climate commitments. Located 30 miles off Brazoria County near Freeport, Texas, the terminal is designed to be the largest deepwater oil export facility in the United States, with a capacity to load two supertankers simultaneously, handling up to 2 million barrels of crude oil each day.
The project, estimated to cost $1.8 billion, is spearheaded by Houston-based Enterprise Products Partners. It received its final necessary approval—a deepwater port license—from the Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration (MARAD), marking the culmination of a five-year federal review process. This approval has been met with vehement opposition from environmental groups, who argue that it stands in stark contradiction to President Joe Biden’s stated goals on climate change and environmental justice.
Critics like Kelsey Crane, a senior policy advocate at Earthworks, emphasize that the terminal will exacerbate environmental degradation through increased greenhouse gas emissions, likening its impact to that of nearly 90 coal-fired power plants. This, they argue, would be a significant setback in the fight against global warming, undermining efforts to transition to sustainable energy sources. Moreover, the approval of such a project could erode Biden’s standing with key supporters, including young voters and environmental groups, particularly after the controversy surrounding the approval of the Willow oil project in Alaska last year.
Despite these concerns, MARAD has defended its decision, stating that the terminal meets several congressionally mandated requirements, including comprehensive environmental assessments. The agency insists that the project will not significantly alter the production or consumption patterns of U.S. crude oil, nor will it meaningfully increase current greenhouse gas emissions within the national crude oil supply chain.
Enterprise Products Partners has highlighted the economic and operational benefits of the project. According to CEO Jim Teague, the terminal will provide a safer, more efficient, and environmentally friendly method of delivering crude oil to global markets. The project also includes the construction of two pipelines that will transport oil from the shore to the deepwater port, minimizing the need for ship-to-ship transfers and potentially reducing the risk of oil spills.
In contrast, environmental activists remain skeptical of the administration’s commitment to climate leadership. Cassidy DiPaola from Fossil Free Media criticized the decision as inconsistent and politically expedient, particularly in light of the administration’s recent moves to pause LNG exports. This decision was especially poignant as it came at the outset of an election year, a time when environmental issues are particularly salient among voters.
The debate extends beyond environmental concerns, touching on economic and geopolitical issues as well. Supporters of LNG exports, including industry groups and some Republican leaders like Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, argue that these exports are vital for stabilizing global energy markets, supporting American jobs, and helping other nations transition away from coal, which is a much dirtier fuel.
The project has indeed been a long time coming, having been first submitted for federal review in 2019. Throughout this period, Enterprise has engaged with federal, state, and local authorities, holding multiple public meetings to gather feedback. These efforts included translating some study materials into Spanish and Vietnamese, which is significant given that over half of Freeport’s residents are Hispanic, according to U.S. Census data.
Despite a recent legal victory where the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed claims by environmental groups that federal agencies had failed to uphold federal environmental laws, the debate over the Sea Port Oil Terminal illustrates the ongoing struggle between fostering economic growth through energy exports and adhering to stringent environmental and climate commitments. As the project moves forward with an expected operational start by 2027, these tensions are likely to persist, reflecting broader national and global challenges in balancing economic development with environmental sustainability.
