Gas Run Aground

The report examines 21 proposed US LNG export terminals, finding that none reached a final investment decision (FID) in 2021 due to a lack of offtake contracts and project financing. It highlights that only three projects secured direct project finance totaling US$1.6 billion against an estimated total cost of US$244 billion. The document argues that these projects face stiff competition from lower-cost producers like Qatar, regulatory hurdles regarding environmental justice, and a global shift toward renewables. Furthermore, it notes that the combined lifecycle emissions of 19 proposed terminals would be 1 gigatonne of CO2 equivalent per year, contradicting the IEA's Net Zero by 2050 Scenario.

• None of the 21 major proposed US LNG export terminals reached a final investment decision (FID) or progressed to the construction phase in 2021.
• There is a significant gap between the estimated total cost of the 21 proposed terminals, approximately US$244 billion, and the identified direct project finance, which totals only US$1.6 billion for three terminals.
• Securing long-term purchasing agreements (offtake contracts) is a critical prerequisite for financing, yet only four of the 21 proposed projects have publicly linked purchasing agreements.
• Japanese financial institutions, specifically SMBC Group, Mitsubishi UFJ Financial, and Mizuho Financial, are the leading creditors for several high-probability US LNG projects, while US-based BlackRock and Vanguard are the primary bond and shareholders.
• Proposed US LNG projects face intense international competition from lower-cost producers, particularly Qatar and Russia, which may undercut US pricing and make new projects economically untenable.
• The expansion of US LNG exports is inconsistent with limiting global warming to 1.5°C; an analysis indicates that 19 proposed terminals would generate 1 gigatonne of CO2 equivalent annually, equivalent to the emissions of 250 coal plants.
• Many proposed LNG terminals are located in communities already burdened by industrial pollution, with a majority of sites near populated areas having pre-existing air quality issues according to the U.S. EPA.
• The International Energy Agency (IEA) suggests that for the world to have a 50% chance of limiting warming to 1.5°C, global LNG exports must peak this decade, and many planned liquefaction facilities are not needed.
• Proposed carbon capture and storage (CCS) facilities at LNG terminals are described as a 'red herring' because they only address a small fraction (8-10%) of full life-cycle emissions.

APA

Rozansky, R. (2022). Gas Run Aground. Global Energy Monitor. https://globalenergymonitor.org/sites/default/files/migration/reports/Gas-Run-Aground-2022_47.pdf

Chicago

Rozansky, Robert. Gas Run Aground. Global Energy Monitor, 2022. https://globalenergymonitor.org/sites/default/files/migration/reports/Gas-Run-Aground-2022_47.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Rozansky |first1=Robert |title=Gas Run Aground |publisher=Global Energy Monitor |date=March 2022 |url=https://globalenergymonitor.org/sites/default/files/migration/reports/Gas-Run-Aground-2022_47.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{rozansky2022gas, author = {Rozansky, Robert}, title = {{Gas Run Aground}}, institution = {Global Energy Monitor}, year = {2022}, month = mar, url = {https://globalenergymonitor.org/sites/default/files/migration/reports/Gas-Run-Aground-2022_47.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }