Should The U.S. Approve (Or Deny) Applications To Export Domestic Natural Gas Faster? (H.R. 351)

What is H.R. 351?

(Updated May 14, 2021)

This bill aims to expedite the approval process for U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) export projects. 

H.R. 351 would require the Department of Energy (DOE) to issue a final decision to approve or deny applications for LNG export projects no later than 30 days after the conclusion of a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review. Under this legislation, there would be a requirement to publicly disclose the LNG export destination prior to final approval of the facility.

Export applications would be given expedited judicial review in the U.S. Court of Appeals regarding DOE orders, or the DOE’s failure to issue a final decision on applications.

Argument in favor

Limiting the amount of time to assess LNG export facilities will prevent long-winded debates (like what's happening with Keystone XL), and will cement deals with potential exporters faster. More jobs, more profit from domestic oil.

Argument opposed

It is unclear if this time constraint will adversely impact the DOE’s ability to conduct a sufficient review of a LNG export facility. Also, it is unclear whether more exports would adversely impact consumers in the U.S. with higher gas prices.

Impact

Consumers of natural gas, LNG exporters and communities where prospective facilities would be located, the DOE, and district-level U.S. Courts of Appeals.

Cost of H.R. 351

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

Additional Info

Of Note: America’s recent domestic energy boom has largely been driven by shale formations — which yield oil and natural gas reserves accessible through innovations in extraction technologies. Over the past six years (as of 2015), increased energy production has added $300 billion to the U.S. economy and created 2 million jobs. In 2013 alone there were new natural gas reserves discovered that totaled 53 trillion cubic feet.

The future of energy consumption in the U.S. has been dramatically altered by this shift, especially as it relates to natural gas. The Energy Information Administration, which tracks trends in energy production and consumption in the U.S., anticipates that natural gas, renewable energy sources, and liquid biofuels will provide for a greater share of U.S. energy consumption as petroleum declines.

LNG exports would offer two major benefits. It would boost the U.S. economy through the construction and staffing of export facilities, such as the $12 billion Sabine Pass facility in Louisiana (which transitioned from an import facility as U.S. reserves increased). Exporting natural gas would also help U.S. trade partners in Europe and Asia, especially as Russia has diverted its natural gas pipelines from Ukraine to Turkey, threatening western Europe’s supply.

However, there are concerns that exporting natural gas could slightly increase domestic prices. This is in addition to concerns about the extraction process and fracking’s potential impact on water sources. While natural gas emits fewer greenhouse gases than petroleum and coal, it is still not as “green” as renewable sources.

Media:

• Sponsoring Rep. Bill Johnson (R-OH) Press Release
• House Energy & Commerce Committee Fact Sheet
• North American Shale Blog (In Favor)
• Bloomberg Businessweek (Context)
• National Taxpayers Union