The Biden administration has yet to release its study on the impacts of natural gas exports, but Republicans in Congress have already said that any research that questions its expansion is fake science.
Republicans are teeing up their arguments for the coming fight over the future of the liquified natural gas industry in the United States. Donald Trump has pledged to immediately restart issuing export permits for liquified natural gas.
The Biden administration is expected by mid-December to release a long-awaited analysis of the effects of increasing LNG exports, the conclusions of which could snarl the speed at which the Trump administration has said it will fulfill its promises to the natural gas industry.
The administration put the pause in place while the Department of Energy conducted the study (designed to replace one issued in 2018) on whether increased LNG exports would be in the public interest.
In a hearing Wednesday, congressional Republicans accused DOE official Brad Crabtree and the Biden White House of shaping the not-yet-released study based on political motivations. Texas Republican Rep. Pat Fallon called the planned study an attempt to “skew the record.”
“Science seems to have been departed from, especially when considering the public interest,” fellow Texas Republican Rep. August Pfluger said, questioning Crabtree.
The administration defended its research, arguing that the promises of increasing American LNG exports needed updated analysis.
“Across presidential administrations, DOE has been respected as one of the most significant and scientific technical organizations,” Crabtree, the director of the research arm for DOE’s Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, said. “When we were faced with the decision of whether to pause our applications and update our analysis, we were looking at incoming applications that would have put our authorizations for export at levels that would have been higher than the DOE has ever even modelled. So this was an appropriate time,” he added.
Environmental groups celebrated the Biden administration’s pause on LNG export permit approvals, which began in January. They have long argued that U.S. LNG exports further long-term global dependence on fossil fuels even when they displace coal power plants abroad.
The LNG industry and Republicans, including Trump, have protested the pause vehemently over the past year, accusing the administration of sacrificing U.S. energy independence and security in favor of climate interests. Republicans also argue that U.S. allies need increased LNG exports. Since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, European countries have relied on LNG from the United States to replace fuel supplied by Russia, a trend they want to continue. At the hearing, Republicans accused the Department of Energy of hiding initial research documents that show that the analysis is politically motivated.
Even so, the study could slow down Republicans’ efforts to immediately further expand LNG production and exports in the United States.
“But whatever the study concludes, the Trump administration cannot just ignore,” said Mary Anne Sullivan, an attorney at Hogan Lovells and a former general counsel for the Department of Energy. “If the Trump administration wants to do something new by way of policy, they are going to have to explain why it’s consistent with what that study concluded or why what that study concluded is no longer relevant.”
The U.S. began exporting LNG in 2016 and, over Biden’s tenure, grew to become the world’s largest exporter in 2023, surpassing Australia and Qatar and setting export records. The U.S. has already approved additional export capacity to about four times current levels, equal to about 45% of current natural gas production, according to Crabtree. Those approvals are not subjected to the pause.
The unprecedented increases in exports justify a reassessment, Crabtree said Wednesday.
The DOE has historically considered whether LNG exports are in the public interest by analyzing how the exports affect the economy and prices for consumers. Previous studies have concluded that exports are indeed the public interest, but the coming study could use different metrics, a different methodology or different data, according to Kevin Book at Clearview Energy Partners.
The new study could incorporate data like the social cost of carbon emissions or the need for more domestic natural gas power production caused by increased demand from data centers, for example.
Because the approvals for export permits reference public interest research, if the Trump administration ignores the conclusions of the new study or relies on older data, any immediate new permit approvals could be more vulnerable to legal challenges, Book said.
Charlie Riedl, the executive director of the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas, agreed. While it depends on the financial interests for each individual company, waiting a few months for the Trump administration to address whatever the DOE concludes would probably provide more safety, he said after Wednesday’s hearing.
“These companies … they’ve set aside the capital. They are not going to want to put themselves in the position of having the facility enjoined before they can proceed,” Book said.
No expert or observer expects the conclusions of the study to actually prevent new export permits from being issued in the end, but some do believe Trump’s push for a quick timeline is only realistic if the DOE’s assessment is positive.
“It’s not necessarily an insurmountable hurdle. They are going to have to take whatever that analysis might be and address it if they want to do something that’s at odd with its conclusions,” Sullivan said.
—
Anna Kramer is a reporter at NOTUS.