The Department of Energy (DoE) has unveiled its comprehensive assessment of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, raising alarms about the environmental, economic, and public health risks associated with this fast-expanding industry. Released on December 17, 2024, the findings highlight both the immediate dangers of LNG exports and their long-term consequences on U.S. energy policy.
This unprecedented review emerges from President Biden’s earlier decision to pause all pending LNG export authorizations, sparked by intensifying public concern over the industry's impact on climate change and domestic energy prices. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm emphasized, "The main takeaway is…a business-as-usual approach is neither sustainable nor advisory." This reflects the administration's shift toward prioritizing the public interest amid mounting climate crises.
The analysis indicates significant socio-economic and environmental challenges: increasing emissions, rising costs for consumers, and potential threats to national security. Specifically, if LNG exports are ramped up, experts project household energy bills could rise by 31% by 2050, translating to over $100 more on average per household. Interestingly, the study also points out the dilemma faced by domestic consumers—while LNG exports expand, local energy costs inch higher, affecting families nationwide.
Of significant concern are the direct impacts of LNG facilities on local communities, particularly along the Gulf Coast, where new terminals are proposed. High emissions from these facilities could exacerbate existing health conditions for vulnerable populations. Climate activist Roishetta Ozane, who runs the Vessel Project of Louisiana, highlighted the prevailing risks by stating, "The expansion of liquefied natural gas exports puts our families at risk... My children face severe health conditions caused by the very pollution LNG facilities unleashed." This stark reality exemplifies the very human cost tied to fossil fuel extraction and exportation.
Commenting on the legal ramifications, environmental advocates see the DOE study as providing a strong foundation for legal challenges against pending LNG export projects. With around 600,000 Americans voicing concerns, including scientists, legal experts, and community members, public pressure mounts to reject new LNG permits altogether. Sarah Martik, Executive Director of the Center for Coalfield Justice, echoed this sentiment, asserting, "LNG exports serve corporate profits, not the public's interest." This highlights the broader struggle between community health and corporate gain within the fossil fuel sector.
Interestingly, the report has reignited the debate about whether LNG exports displace more harmful emission sources or contribute to increased greenhouse gas emissions overall. The analysis claims LNG exports could lead to additional greenhouse emissions equivalent to 711 million metric tons between 2020 and 2050 under various scenarios. This raises concerns, especially as climate policies globally tighten and pressure increases to lower emissions.
Despite the alarming findings, the natural gas industry and its advocates argue for the economic benefits derived from LNG exports. Since 2016, the U.S. has established significant LNG export capabilities, contributing over $400 billion to GDP and supporting approximately 273,000 jobs—a figure expected to grow to 495,000 by 2040 according to S&P Global. Proponents assert, as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce contends, this endeavor not only secures American energy independence but aids international allies too—particularly European nations seeking to reduce dependency on Russian gas.
The findings from the DOE study paint a complex picture: increasing LNG exports could weaken renewable energy adoption, with potential rise curves for renewable solutions reversing what is now seen as progress toward cleaner energy. Granholm, urging facts to guide future decisions, noted, "Climate science makes clear the world can’t afford any expansion of LNG exports… Insufficiently addressing the climate and health impact of LNG proposals could undermine paths to clean energy.”
The study’s conclusions raise pivotal questions for President Biden and his administration as the new year approaches. With the incoming administration of Donald Trump likely to favor the expansion of LNG exports, the Biden administration faces pressure from both sides: industry lobbies calling for expedience and environmental advocates demanding caution. The administration's approach will not only dictate U.S. energy policy moving forward but also determine the pace at which communities nearer to these facilities face health risks and economic changes due to fluctuated energy prices.
With the 60-day comment period now underway, it serves as both a forum for public input and preparation for future legal and administrative battles. The Department of Energy has laid out the groundwork necessary for serious regulatory discussions—a turning point ensuring the future of U.S. LNG exports weighs heavily on community welfare, sustainability, and global climate stewardship.
