• 3 minutes e-car sales collapse
  • 6 minutes America Is Exceptional in Its Political Divide
  • 11 minutes Perovskites, a ‘dirt cheap’ alternative to silicon, just got a lot more efficient
  • 8 days The United States produced more crude oil than any nation, at any time.
  • 1 day e-truck insanity
  • 7 days How Far Have We Really Gotten With Alternative Energy
  • 7 days China deletes leaked stats showing plunging birth rate for 2023
  • 8 days The European Union is exceptional in its political divide. Examples are apparent in Hungary, Slovakia, Sweden, Netherlands, Belarus, Ireland, etc.
  • 5 days Bad news for e-cars keeps coming

Breaking News:

Asia Coal Imports Remain Strong in June

Nick Cunningham

Nick Cunningham

Nick Cunningham is an independent journalist, covering oil and gas, energy and environmental policy, and international politics. He is based in Portland, Oregon. 

More Info

Premium Content

Why the Debate Over U.S. LNG Exports Has Been Won

Why the Debate Over U.S. LNG Exports Has Been Won

The debate over natural gas exports appears to be over.

On Sept. 10, the U.S. Department of Energy approved two more export terminals for liquefied natural gas (LNG) and it barely made any news. The decision means that there are now three projects that have cleared all hurdles, allowing construction to begin.

More are in the offing. The Obama administration has shown itself entirely open to idea of exporting LNG, even though it prefers a gradual and deliberate approach rather than the blanket approval favored by the oil and gas industry.

Environmental groups have opposed exports, arguing that opening up the U.S. to foreign energy markets would increase demand and thereby potentially lead to the dramatic increase in domestic drilling. While true, this argument seems to have garnered little traction in Congress, the administration, or with the wider public.

To be sure, there are polls that indicate that the public is not entirely sold on LNG exports. One University of Texas poll from 2013 shows the balance tilted in favor of Americans opposed to allowing exports of natural gas – 39 percent opposed compared to 28 percent who approved.

But that doesn’t mean Americans are passionate about it. In fact the Obama administration and Congressional Democrats have received little blowback for the LNG projects that have received approval. And with tacit or overt support from Democrats, the LNG issue has largely been won by export supporters.

For example, Sen. Mark Udall, who’s better known for his passionate support of wind power, introduced a bill earlier this year to expand LNG exports. In an election year, he has been careful not to be outdone by his unabashedly pro-export Republican opponent.

Another example can be found in Maryland. Despite being an overwhelmingly blue state with a relatively strong environmental record, even Democratic politicians have come out in favor of a proposed LNG export terminal on the Chesapeake Bay. The Cove Point facility is still in permitting phase, but Governor Marin O’Malley has hinted at his support for the project, to the dismay of environmental groups.

Congressman Steny Hoyer (D-MD), a powerful Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives, has been much more vocal in his support. “The proposed Cove Point LNG liquefaction project has the potential to make a significant contribution to Southern Maryland's economy. Today's announcement helps to ensure the project's viability and moves us closer to the job creation that its development is expected to bring to Calvert County and to Maryland,” Hoyer said in a press release when Dominion secured agreements from overseas customers to buy its LNG.

Then there are the much more pro-fossil fuel Democrats. For example, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), the chairwoman of the Senate Energy Committee, predictably praised the approval of the two LNG licenses on Sept. 10. Even Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), an LNG export skeptic and former head of the Senate Energy Committee, has charted a middle course in the past, favoring a moderate amount of exports.

Perhaps more importantly, the undeclared front runner in the 2016 presidential race, Hillary Clinton, supports exporting LNG. In a recent speech she gave on energy, she discussed the benefits of exporting natural gas and oil.

Revealingly, as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton also headed up a global initiative to sell other countries on hydraulic fracturing within their borders. She met with leaders in several Eastern European countries, pressuring them to allow American companies to drill for shale gas, according to Mother Jones. As the likely standard bearer of the Democratic Party in 2016, her support for natural gas exports and fracking will make it difficult for environmental groups to block the strong momentum in favor of expanding gas development.


And the pace of export approvals could accelerate, rather than slow down. The approval of two more LNG export licenses received support  -- though muted -- from Republicans, who applauded the move but urged swifter approval process. Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND) has announced plans to co-author bipartisan legislation that would make it much easier for companies to receive licenses.

So, with many prominent Democrats co-opted into the pro-LNG export camp, including the current Democratic president and the likely future Democratic presidential candidate, there’s little left to debate, except maybe how many terminals will be approved, and how quickly.

By Nick Cunningham of Oilprice.com

Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • Lynden on September 17 2014 said:
    It should be pointed out that Cove Point is presently and has been an LNG importing terminal.
    The slow pace of export licenses will probably save some potential participants several billion dollars.

Leave a comment

EXXON Mobil -0.35
Open57.81 Trading Vol.6.96M Previous Vol.241.7B
BUY 57.15
Sell 57.00
Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News