ADVERTISEABOUT USSUBMIT A STORYSUBSCRIBETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICY
Visit our family of Brands

Barge hits bridge connecting Galveston and Pelican Island, causing partial collapse and oil spill

A barge hit a bridge in Galveston, resulting in an oil spill. No injuries were reported. Photo via portofgalveston.com

A barge slammed into a bridge pillar in Galveston, Texas, on Wednesday, spilling oil into waters near busy shipping channels and closing the only road to a small neighboring island. No injuries were reported.

The impact sent pieces of the bridge, which connects Galveston to Pelican Island, tumbling on top of the barge and shut down a stretch of waterway so crews could clean up the spill. The accident knocked one man off the vessel and into the water, but he was quickly recovered and was not injured, said Galveston County Sheriff’s Office Maj. Ray Nolen.

Ports along the Texas coast are hubs of international trade, but experts said the collision was unlikely to result in serious economic disruptions since it occurred in a lesser-used waterway. The island is on the opposite side of Galveston Island’s beaches that draw millions of tourists each year.

The accident happened shortly before 10 a.m. after a tugboat operator pushing two barges lost control of them, said David Flores, a bridge superintendent with the Galveston County Navigation District.

“The current was very bad, and the tide was high," Flores said. “He lost it.”

Pelican Island is only a few miles wide and is home to Texas A&M University at Galveston, a large shipyard and industrial facilities. Fewer than 200 people were on the campus when the collision happened, and all were eventually allowed to drive on the bridge to leave. The marine and maritime research institute said it plans to remain closed until at least Friday. Students who live on campus were allowed to remain there, but university officials warned those who live on campus and leave “should be prepared to remain off campus for an unknown period of time.”

The accident came weeks after a cargo ship crashed into a support column of the Francis Key Bridge in Baltimore on March 26, killing six construction workers.

The tugboat in Texas was pushing bunker barges, which are fuel barges for ships, Flores said. The barge, which is owned by Martin Petroleum, has a 30,000-gallon capacity, but it's not clear how much leaked into the bay, said Galveston County spokesperson Spencer Lewis. He said about 6.5 miles (10.5 kilometers) of the waterway were shut down because of the spill.

The affected area is miles away from the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, which sees frequent barge traffic, and the Houston Ship Channel, a large shipping channel for ocean-going vessels. Aside from the environmental impact of the spill, the region is unlikely to see large economic disruption as a result of the accident, said Marcia Burns, a maritime transportation expert at the University of Houston

“Because Pelican Island is a smaller location, which is not in the heart of commercial events, then the impact is not as devastating," Burns said. “It’s a relatively smaller impact.”

At the bridge, a large piece of broken concrete and debris from the railroad hung over the side and on top of the barge that rammed into the passageway. Flores said the rail line only serves as protection for the structure and has never been used.

Opened in 1960, the Pelican Island Causeway Bridge was rated as “Poor” according to the Federal Highway Administration’s 2023 National Bridge Inventory released last June.

The overall rating of a bridge is based on whether the condition of any of its individual components — the deck, superstructure, substructure or culvert, if present — is rated poor or below.

In the case of the Pelican Island Causeway Bridge, inspectors rated the deck in “Satisfactory Condition,” the substructure in “Fair Condition” and the superstructure — or the component that absorbs the live traffic load — in “Poor Condition.”

The Texas Department of Transportation had been scheduled in the summer of 2025 to begin construction on a project to replace the bridge with a new one. The project was estimated to cost $194 million. In documents provided during a virtual public meeting last year, the department said the bridge has “reached the end of its design lifespan, and needs to be replaced.” The agency said it has spent over $12 million performing maintenance and repairs on the bridge in the past decade.

The bridge has one main steel span that measures 164 feet (50 meters), and federal data shows it was last inspected in December 2021. It’s unclear from the data if a state inspection took place after the Federal Highway Administration compiled the data.

The bridge had an average daily traffic figure of about 9,100 cars and trucks, according to a 2011 estimate.

___

Lozano reported from Houston. Associated Press reporters Christopher L. Keller in Albuquerque, New Mexico; Valerie Gonzalez in McAllen, Texas; Acacia Coronado in Austin, Texas; and Ken Miller in Oklahoma City contributed to this report.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

What EPA’s carbon capture and storage permitting announcement means for Texas

The View From HETI

Earlier this month, Texas was granted authority by the federal government for permitting carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects. This move could help the U.S. cut emissions while staying competitive in the global energy game.

In June, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed approving Texas’ request for permitting authority under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) for Class VI underground injection wells for carbon capture and storage (CCS) in the state under a process called “primacy.” The State of Texas already has permitting authority for other injection wells (Classes I-V). In November, the EPA announced final approval of Texas’ primacy request.

Why This Matters for Texas

Texas is the headquarters for virtually every segment of the energy industry. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Texas is the top crude oil- and natural-gas producing state in the nation. The state has more crude oil refineries and refining capacity than any other state in the nation. Texas produces more electricity than any other state, and the demand for electricity will grow with the development of data centers and artificial intelligence (AI). Simply put, Texas is the backbone of the nation’s energy security and competitiveness. For the nation’s economic competitiveness, it is important that Texas continue to produce more energy with less emissions. CCS is widely regarded as necessary to continue to lower the emissions intensity of the U.S. industrial sector for critical products including power generation, refining, chemicals, steel, cement and other products that our country and world demand.

The Greater Houston Partnership’s Houston Energy Transition Initiative (HETI) has supported efforts to bring CCUS to a broader commercial scale since the initiative’s inception.

“Texas is uniquely positioned to deploy CCUS at scale, with world-class geology, a skilled workforce, and strong infrastructure. We applaud the EPA for granting Texas the authority to permit wells for CCUS, which we believe will result in safe and efficient permitting while advancing technologies that strengthen Texas’ leadership in the global energy market,” said Jane Stricker, Executive Director of HETI and Senior Vice President, Energy Transition at the Greater Houston Partnership.

What is Primacy, and Why is it Important?

Primacy grants permitting authority for Class VI wells for CCS to the Texas Railroad Commission instead of the EPA. Texas is required to follow the same strict standards the EPA uses. The EPA has reviewed Texas’ application and determined it meets those requirements.

Research suggests that Texas has strong geological formations for CO2 storage, a world-class, highly skilled workforce, and robust infrastructure primed for the deployment of CCS. However, federal permitting delays are stalling billions of dollars of private sector investment. There are currently 257 applications under review, nearly one-quarter of which are located in Texas, with some applications surpassing the EPA’s target review period of 24 months. This creates uncertainty for developers and investors and keeps thousands of potential jobs out of reach. By transferring permitting to the state, Texas will apply local resources to issue Class VI permits across the states in a timely manner.

Texas joins North Dakota, Wyoming, Louisiana, West Virginia and Arizona with the authority for regulating Class VI wells.

Is CCS safe?

A 2025 study by Texas A&M University reviewed operational history and academic literature on CCS in the United States. The study analyzed common concerns related to CCS efficacy and safety and found that CCS reduces pollutants including carbon dioxide, particulate matter, sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides. The research found that the risks of CCS present a low probability of impacting human life and can be effectively managed through existing state and federal regulations and technical monitoring and safety protocols.

What’s Next?

The final rule granting Texas’ primacy will become effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Once in effect, the Texas Railroad Commission will be responsible for permitting wells for carbon capture, use and storage and enforcing their safe operation.

———

This article originally ran on the Greater Houston Partnership's Houston Energy Transition Initiative blog. HETI exists to support Houston's future as an energy leader. For more information about the Houston Energy Transition Initiative, EnergyCapitalHTX's presenting sponsor, visit htxenergytransition.org.

Houston energy expert: How the U.S. can turn carbon into growth

Guets Column

For the past 40 years, climate policy has often felt like two steps forward, one step back. Regulations shift with politics, incentives get diluted, and long-term aspirations like net-zero by 2050 seem increasingly out of reach. Yet greenhouse gases continue to rise, and the challenges they pose are not going away.

This matters because the costs are real. Extreme weather is already straining U.S. power grids, damaging homes, and disrupting supply chains. Communities are spending more on recovery while businesses face rising risks to operations and assets. So, how can the U.S. prepare and respond?

The Baker Institute Center for Energy Studies (CES) points to two complementary strategies. First, invest in large-scale public adaptation to protect communities and infrastructure. Second, reframe carbon as a resource, not just a waste stream to be reduced.

Why Focusing on Emissions Alone Falls Short

Peter Hartley argues that decades of global efforts to curb emissions have done little to slow the rise of CO₂. International cooperation is difficult, the costs are felt immediately, and the technologies needed are often expensive. Emissions reduction has been the central policy tool for decades, and it has been neither sufficient nor effective.

One practical response is adaptation, which means preparing for climate impacts we can’t avoid. Some of these measures are private, taken by households or businesses to reduce their own risks, such as farmers shifting crop types, property owners installing fire-resistant materials, or families improving insulation. Others are public goods that require policy action. These include building stronger levees and flood defenses, reinforcing power grids, upgrading water systems, revising building codes, and planning for wildfire risks. Such efforts protect people today while reducing long-term costs, and they work regardless of the source of extreme weather. Adaptation also does not depend on global consensus; each country, state, or city can act in its own interest. Many of these measures even deliver benefits beyond weather resilience, such as stronger infrastructure and improved security against broader threats.

McKinsey research reinforces this logic. Without a rapid scale-up of climate adaptation, the U.S. will face serious socioeconomic risks. These include damage to infrastructure and property from storms, floods, and heat waves, as well as greater stress on vulnerable populations and disrupted supply chains.

Making Carbon Work for Us

While adaptation addresses immediate risks, Ken Medlock points to a longer-term opportunity: turning carbon into value.

Carbon can serve as a building block for advanced materials in construction, transportation, power transmission, and agriculture. Biochar to improve soils, carbon composites for stronger and lighter products, and next-generation fuels are all examples. As Ken points out, carbon-to-value strategies can extend into construction and infrastructure. Beyond creating new markets, carbon conversion could deliver lighter and more resilient materials, helping the U.S. build infrastructure that is stronger, longer-lasting, and better able to withstand climate stress.

A carbon-to-value economy can help the U.S. strengthen its manufacturing base and position itself as a global supplier of advanced materials.

These solutions are not yet economic at scale, but smart policies can change that. Expanding the 45Q tax credit to cover carbon use in materials, funding research at DOE labs and universities, and supporting early markets would help create the conditions for growth.

Conclusion

Instead of choosing between “doing nothing” and “net zero at any cost,” we need a third approach that invests in both climate resilience and carbon conversion.

Public adaptation strengthens and improves the infrastructure we rely on every day, including levees, power grids, water systems, and building standards that protect communities from climate shocks. Carbon-to-value strategies can complement these efforts by creating lighter, more resilient carbon-based infrastructure.

CES suggests this combination is a pragmatic way forward. As Peter emphasizes, adaptation works because it is in each nation’s self-interest. And as Ken reminds us, “The U.S. has a comparative advantage in carbon. Leveraging it to its fullest extent puts the U.S. in a position of strength now and well into the future.”

-----------

Scott Nyquist is a senior advisor at McKinsey & Company and vice chairman, Houston Energy Transition Initiative of the Greater Houston Partnership. The views expressed herein are Nyquist's own and not those of McKinsey & Company or of the Greater Houston Partnership. This article originally appeared on LinkedIn.

UH launches new series on AI’s impact on the energy sector

where to be

The University of Houston's Energy Transition Institute has launched a new Energy in Action Seminar Series that will feature talks focused on the intersection of the energy industry and digitization trends, such as AI.

The first event in the series took place earlier this month, featuring Raiford Smith, global market lead for power & energy for Google Cloud, who presented "AI, Energy, and Data Centers." The talk discussed the benefits of widespread AI adoption for growth in traditional and low-carbon energy resources.

Future events include:

“Through this timely and informative seminar series, ETI will bring together energy professionals, researchers, students, and anyone working in or around digital innovation in energy," Debalina Sengupta, chief operating officer of ETI, said in a news release. "We encourage industry members and students to register now and reap the benefits of participating in both the seminar and the reception, which presents a fantastic opportunity to stay ahead of industry developments and build a strong network in the Greater Houston energy ecosystem.”

The series is slated to continue throughout 2026. Each presentation is followed by a one-hour networking reception. Register for the next event here.

View All Listings