Skip to main content

APGA speaks out against LNG exports once again

Hydrocarbon Engineering,

Motion filed

The APGA filed a motion on 16 November 2014 to intervene in opposition to an application filed by Alaskan LNG to export 20 million tpy of LNG from a liquefaction facility to be constructed in the Nikiski area of the Kenai Peninsula in south central Alaska. The LNG would be exported to both free trade agreement (FTA) and non-FTA countries. As of 21 October 2014, there have been over 40 LNG export applications submitted to the US Department of Energy (DOE). The sum total of these applications is 42.48 billion ft3/d to FTA countries and 38.06 billion ft3 to non-FTA countries. In reviewing an application the DOE is responsible for ensuring that an export application is in the public interest. By law, LNG export applications to FTA countries must be approved without modification or delay.

In its filing, APGA communicates that it is not opposing the application on its merits. Although APGA opposes the export of LNG from the lower 48, APFA does not oppose the export of natural gas from Alaska given the stranded nature of Alaskan LNG. However, APGA’s motion does express support for DOE’s new procedure, which this application seeks to bypass, in which DOE will not make a public interest determination until a National Environmental Policy Act review is completed.

Arguing against

On 20 November 2014, APGA’s Vice President of Operations, John Erickson, explained APGA’s opposition to exporting LNG during a panel discussion at the Pipeline Safety Trust’s Annual Conference in New Orleans. The Pipeline Safety Trust is a non-profit organisation that promotes pipeline safety through education and advocacy and was formed after the 1999 hazardous liquid pipeline accident in Bellingham, Washington.

The panel addressed the pros and cons of exporting domestic energy resources. John cited a recent EIA study that concluded that exporting LNG would more than double natural gas prices by 2040. He argued that a better use of US domestic natural gas resources would be to use it in the country to reduce oil imports to move the nation further toward the goal of energy independence. Exporting LNG would squander the energy cost advantage that US manufacturers enjoy over manufacturers in countries like Japan and South Korea where natural gas costs far more than in the US.

Also serving on the panel were Karen Hasse of the API, who argued for LNG exports, and Carl Weimer of the Pipeline Safety Trust, who raised concerns about the environmental and energy consumption effects of liquefying natural gas.

Edited from press releases by Claira Lloyd

Read the article online at:


Embed article link: (copy the HTML code below):