Take Action to Stop Dangerous Gas Exports

The Biden administration took bold action to protect our climate and communities by temporarily pausing new export approvals of liquefied methane gas facilities, known as LNG, while they review the process by which they determine if these facilities are in the public interest. The global scientific consensus is already clear -- increasing reliance on fossil fuels is not in the public's interest. Neither are the disasterous economic, environmental, and health impacts caused to the communities forced to live with the LNG export terminals.

This pause is a crucial step, but it is NOT a ban on LNG.

Right now, the US is the largest exporter of gas in the world, and the Department of Energy (DOE) has already authorized enough gas exports to triple its current levels.

The LNG pause is our opportunity to shape the analysis that President Biden and the DOE consider when looking at new methane gas exports moving forward. They have the authority to deny these gas export permits, and the obligation to say “no” when the impacts and harms of these facilities outweigh their benefits to the public. the updated review process must include:

An evaluation of the full risks of LNG exports, including environmental justice impacts, harm to the health of local communities and critical ecosystems, and increased prices for American families. This includes concluding a comprehensive review under the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act with a rigorous, cumulative environmental and climate justice analysis that details environmental and community harms across the whole supply and delivery chain.
Meaningful and robust public participation, including public hearings and consultation with impacted communities early on in the process, to ensure that people's comments and contributions are included in the outcome.
A review of the impact LNG has on displacing renewable energy globally using the latest science, not just relying on outdated assumptions that LNG would replace dirty fossil fuels like coal, as we transition to a clean energy future.

We got this pause in new LNG export licenses because more than 400,000 people spoke out, but more is needed. With your help, we will stop dirty and dangerous gas exports once and for all.

13079

signatures of 20000 goal

Continue

Title

First Name

Last Name

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Phone

Your Message

Subject

Please Deny the Lake Charles LNG Export Permits

Add a Personal Message

Personal messages make a big impact on decision makers. Please add a note about why this issue matters to you!

1000 characters remaining

Message

Dear President Biden and Secretary Granholm,

Thank you for your commitment to protect our climate and communities by pausing the licensing of more Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) exports. The pause is an important opportunity not just to update the previous economic and environmental reports that the Department of Energy (DOE) relies on for making a public interest determination, but also to broaden the analysis to incorporate other factors like environmental justice into the process.

We urge DOE to scrutinize impacts from the entire LNG lifecycle to determine if new export facilities are in the public interest. DOE must analyze the factors used when making a Public Interest Determination to ensure it accurately captures the full risks of LNG exports. Until this point, no DOE Public Interest Determination study has ever considered environmental justice impacts. DOE's updated analyses, as well as review under NEPA, MUST include a rigorous, cumulative environmental and climate justice analysis that details the harms across the whole supply and delivery chain. In addition to examining disparate health and environmental harms, DOE must examine  the distributional and energy justice impacts increased prices will have on domestic consumers. DOE must conduct a comprehensive National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review. This review should include a programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). A PEIS allows for a comprehensive review for projects that affect numerous jurisdictions. A PEIS is necessary here because the massive LNG buildout affects many communities across multiple regions.

DOE must also use the latest climate science and plan for a global just transition to renewable energy as the baseline. LNG is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions and the studies that DOE has been relying on to make its Public Interest Determination are flawed. Previous DOE analysis merely compared the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of U.S. LNG to those of other fossil fuels. But it is clear that not all exports will displace other fossil fuel use, and that exports compete against renewable energy and conservation efforts, especially in Europe. Renewables are already globally competitive, and the transition to renewable energy will only gain momentum leading to 2050–the duration of DOE’s export authorizations. Merely comparing lifecycle emissions with other fossil fuels also ignores international commitments to reduce U.S. emissions.

Public participation is critical to the review process and DOE must ensure meaningful public participation opportunities throughout. “Meaningful” in this case means that people’s comments and contributions have consequences; that people and communities have the power to change the outcome of DOE’s decision. This public participation process should include the opportunity for impacted community members and environmental justice leaders and scholars to provide input and guidance of the methods and direction of the studies that will inform the public interest determination, in addition to having a robust public comment period for any draft completed reports. Comments received in this manner should not only be addressed by DOE fully, they should be incorporated in a way to revise the study.

The Administration’s decision to pause the approval of new export licenses is a positive first step, but it is past time for a robust review of LNG export proposals and we call on you to ensure that this pause results in denying LNG export applications that aren’t in the public interest. Over the past several years, concern has increased over the impacts that gas exports have on frontline communities as well as the climate. Once DOE looks at the true economic, social, environmental costs of more LNG exports, it must conclude—consistent with the global scientific consensus—that locking in more fossil fuel infrastructure is not in the public interest.

Dear President Biden and Secretary Granholm, Thank you for your commitment to protect our climate and communities by pausing the licensing of more Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) exports. The pause is an important opportunity not just to update the previous economic and environmental reports that the Department of Energy (DOE) relies on for making a public interest determination, but also to broaden the analysis to incorporate other factors like environmental justice into the process. We urge DOE to scrutinize impacts from the entire LNG lifecycle to determine if new export facilities are in the public interest. DOE must analyze the factors used when making a Public Interest Determination to ensure it accurately captures the full risks of LNG exports. Until this point, no DOE Public Interest Determination study has ever considered environmental justice impacts. DOE's updated analyses, as well as review under NEPA, MUST include a rigorous, cumulative environmental and climate justice analysis that details the harms across the whole supply and delivery chain. In addition to examining disparate health and environmental harms, DOE must examine the distributional and energy justice impacts increased prices will have on domestic consumers. DOE must conduct a comprehensive National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review. This review should include a programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). A PEIS allows for a comprehensive review for projects that affect numerous jurisdictions. A PEIS is necessary here because the massive LNG buildout affects many communities across multiple regions. DOE must also use the latest climate science and plan for a global just transition to renewable energy as the baseline. LNG is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions and the studies that DOE has been relying on to make its Public Interest Determination are flawed. Previous DOE analysis merely compared the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of U.S. LNG to those of other fossil fuels. But it is clear that not all exports will displace other fossil fuel use, and that exports compete against renewable energy and conservation efforts, especially in Europe. Renewables are already globally competitive, and the transition to renewable energy will only gain momentum leading to 2050–the duration of DOE’s export authorizations. Merely comparing lifecycle emissions with other fossil fuels also ignores international commitments to reduce U.S. emissions. Public participation is critical to the review process and DOE must ensure meaningful public participation opportunities throughout. “Meaningful” in this case means that people’s comments and contributions have consequences; that people and communities have the power to change the outcome of DOE’s decision. This public participation process should include the opportunity for impacted community members and environmental justice leaders and scholars to provide input and guidance of the methods and direction of the studies that will inform the public interest determination, in addition to having a robust public comment period for any draft completed reports. Comments received in this manner should not only be addressed by DOE fully, they should be incorporated in a way to revise the study. The Administration’s decision to pause the approval of new export licenses is a positive first step, but it is past time for a robust review of LNG export proposals and we call on you to ensure that this pause results in denying LNG export applications that aren’t in the public interest. Over the past several years, concern has increased over the impacts that gas exports have on frontline communities as well as the climate. Once DOE looks at the true economic, social, environmental costs of more LNG exports, it must conclude—consistent with the global scientific consensus—that locking in more fossil fuel infrastructure is not in the public interest.

4000 characters remaining

By taking this action to protect the planet, you are affirming you want to receive regular Sierra Club communications and may vote on policy designated by the Sierra Club Board. Additionally, by giving your mobile number, you consent to receive phone and text communications from Sierra Club organizations.