The White House has made the unprecedented decision to halt the permitting process for several proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal projects due to concerns about their potential impact on climate change. This move comes after months of demands from environmentalists who argue that these projects will lead to increased emissions and worsen global warming.
The joint announcement was made by the White House and the Department of Energy (DOE), stating that the pause in the permitting process would allow federal officials to conduct a thorough environmental review of the projects’ carbon emissions. This review is estimated to take more than a year to complete. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm emphasized the need to consider comprehensive analysis of economic, environmental, and national security factors when reviewing export applications for U.S. natural gas.
Granholm also expressed the commitment of the United States to affordable energy, economic opportunities, and energy security, while also acknowledging the importance of protecting Americans against climate change and transitioning towards a clean energy future. This decision aligns with President Biden’s leadership on climate change, as demonstrated by the U.S.’s active participation in the recent U.N. climate conference and efforts to transition away from fossil fuels globally.
While it is uncertain which proposed projects will be impacted by this decision, it is confirmed that at least two projects with larger capacities and two with smaller capacities will be affected. The pause will only apply to projects that have completed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) approval process and are awaiting DOE approval. Currently, there are 11 projects that have been approved by FERC but have not yet begun construction, four projects pending before FERC, and two projects in the pre-filing stage.
Opposition to LNG export terminals stems from concerns about harmful pollution and their contribution to global warming. Activists have taken to social media platforms to share videos highlighting these concerns, which have garnered millions of views in recent months. Environmental groups and scientists have also written letters urging the rejection of LNG development.
However, proponents of additional LNG export facilities argue that these projects are crucial for meeting energy demand in Europe and Asia, particularly as these regions seek to reduce their reliance on Russian natural gas supplies. Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine earlier this year, President Biden made a commitment to send more U.S. LNG to Europe, emphasizing the importance of energy security for U.S. allies.
Former FERC Chair Neil Chatterjee expressed concern about the decision, stating that it could jeopardize energy security and compromise commitments made to European allies. He emphasized the importance of U.S. LNG in displacing more carbon-intensive fossil fuels globally and lowering global carbon emissions.
Energy associations Eurogas and the Asia Natural Gas & Energy Association (ANGEA) have voiced strong support for the continued permitting of U.S. LNG export terminals. Eurogas highlighted the importance of such exports for reducing Europe’s dependence on Russian natural gas, while ANGEA emphasized their role in helping Asia achieve decarbonization goals. The German state-owned energy company, Securing Energy for Europe, also stressed the significance of U.S. LNG for Germany’s energy security.
The American Petroleum Institute (API) and other fossil fuel industry associations joined forces in a letter to Secretary Granholm, calling for the continuation of LNG export permitting. They argued that LNG exports benefit American consumers, support U.S. jobs, and contribute to global emissions reduction.
Proponents of increased LNG exports also argue that transitioning to natural gas is essential for meeting decarbonization goals. They assert that without increased LNG exports, nations would rely more heavily on coal-fired power generation, which has a significantly larger carbon footprint.
In conclusion, the White House’s decision to pause the permitting process for proposed LNG export terminal projects reflects its commitment to addressing climate change concerns and transitioning towards a clean energy future. While environmentalists have applauded this move, proponents of LNG exports argue that these projects are vital for energy security, reducing reliance on Russian natural gas, and achieving global emissions reduction goals. The outcome of the comprehensive environmental review will have significant implications for the future of LNG exports and the global energy landscape.