The administration of President Joe Biden is facing mounting pressure to obstruct the construction of what could become one of the world’s largest gas export hubs. This facility, which is proposed to be located perilously close to the rapidly diminishing Louisiana shoreline, is raising concerns regarding its significant climate impact and its potential effects on communities within a region experiencing an unprecedented expansion of new gas infrastructure along the Gulf of Mexico.
The ambitious $10 billion undertaking, known as Calcasieu Pass 2 (CP2), is earmarked for development in Cameron parish on the coast of Louisiana. CP2 aims to facilitate the transportation of gas extracted through fracking by way of a newly constructed pipeline to a terminal where it will be condensed into a liquid form, chilled to an astonishing -260F (-162C), and subsequently shipped to overseas markets, including those in Europe.
Once operational, CP2 is set to become a major player in the surge of new gas pipelines and terminals that are now increasingly dotting the Gulf coast. Interestingly, the Biden administration, while addressing environmental concerns, has simultaneously highlighted the role of gas exports to European allies, particularly in light of Russia’s incursion into Ukraine.
Environmental organizations have issued stern warnings that by permitting terminals like CP2, President Biden risks undermining his own efforts to combat the climate crisis within the United States and jeopardizing international climate objectives. A decision on CP2, which is expected to be made by federal regulators within the next month, hangs in the balance.
Bill McKibben, the esteemed climate activist and co-founder of 350.org, expressed his concerns, declaring the current pursuit of such projects in 2023 as “obscene and dangerous,” particularly during what scientists have labeled as the hottest year experienced on Earth in 125,000 years. The sheer magnitude of these new gas facilities remains relatively unknown to most Americans, according to McKibben.
The growth of the gas-export industry in the United States has been nothing short of remarkable. A mere decade ago, the U.S. had minimal gas exports, and now it stands as the world’s leading gas exporter, with exports having doubled over the past four years. The first half of this year recorded record levels of exports, driven by efficient fracking technologies utilized in the gas fields spanning Texas and New Mexico.
Proponents of the burgeoning gas-export sector contend that sending liquefied natural gas (LNG) overseas not only stimulates domestic employment but also displaces the use of more polluting fossil fuels, such as coal, in other countries.
Venture Global, the company behind CP2, defends the project, asserting that environmental activists opposing it are out of touch with reality. The company argues that restricting access to cleaner energy sources would lead to continued coal usage and hinder global emissions reduction.
Critics, however, point out that the production of LNG, when considering drilling, production, and burning, contributes significantly to the climate crisis. Studies have demonstrated that while natural gas emits less carbon dioxide than coal, it often involves the release of substantial amounts of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
Describing CP2 as a “carbon mega bomb,” Jeremy Symons, a former Environmental Protection Agency official, argues that the project is alarming in scale and locks the nation into fossil fuel dependency for the next three decades. Symons estimates that CP2 would emit 197 million tons of planet-warming gases annually once fully operational, including emissions from gas production and its eventual combustion overseas, which is not included in the United States’ emissions calculation.
Should numerous other proposed gas-export facilities along the Gulf of Mexico also proceed with construction, the collective emissions toll would be astronomical, posing a severe threat to international climate goals. According to Symons, if all these terminals are approved, they would result in an additional 3.2 billion tons of greenhouse gases annually, nearly equivalent to the entire European Union’s annual emissions and endangering hopes of averting catastrophic global warming.
CP2’s fate is contingent on permissions from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), responsible for regulating pipelines, and the U.S. Department of Energy. Several Democratic lawmakers have criticized FERC and the Biden administration for approving extensive gas projects despite climate concerns, as well as potential adverse impacts on nearby communities already affected by existing oil and gas infrastructure along the Gulf coast.
Local opponents of CP2 argue that the project will exacerbate the issues faced by Calcasieu Pass, an existing Venture Global gas plant in Cameron parish. This facility, which began operations last year, already faces potential fines from Louisiana regulators due to numerous air pollution violations.
Adding to the complications, the low-lying Louisiana coastline is suffering from subsidence while being exposed to rising sea levels, factors linked to the climate crisis. Venture Global’s plan for a 30-foot protective wall around CP2 is raising questions about its long-term effectiveness, given the surrounding area’s rapid transition to shallow water.
Torbjörn Törnqvist, a geologist at Tulane University, pointed out that CP2’s location is far from ideal due to the ongoing subsidence of the region. While a protective wall may shield the facility itself, the feasibility of accessing and operating the site in the face of rising waters remains uncertain.
The CP2 project is emblematic of a critical juncture, where the environmental and economic interests associated with gas exports intersect with concerns for the environment and climate change. The outcome of the deliberations surrounding CP2 will have far-reaching implications for both domestic and international climate objectives.