Committee Leaders Concerned About Flawed Science Behind LNG Pause

Committee Leaders Concerned about Flawed Science behind LNG Pause

118th Congress Energy

August 13, 2024

Yesterday, Chairman Frank Lucas (R-OK) was joined by Energy Subcommittee Chairman Brandon Williams (R-NY), Environment Subcommittee Chairman Max Miller (R-OH), and Investigations & Oversight Subcommittee Chairman Jay Obernolte (R-CA) in a letter to the Department of Energy (DOE) on the Administration’s prohibition on exporting U.S. liquified natural gas (LNG).

The letter is the third the committee has sent to the Department raising concerns about the lack of a scientific basis for the LNG pause. Today’s letter comes after a report from the Breakthrough Institute detailing flaws in a widely cited study that confirms many of the committee’s concerns regarding the scientific justification for this pause.

Research from Cornell University professor Robert Howarth claiming natural gas is “worse than coal” has been cited as a justification for pausing LNG exports until DOE can update the analyses it uses to establish LNG export authorizations. Yet, as the Breakthrough Institute report discusses in great detail, Dr. Howarth’s methodology is deeply flawed. “This has confirmed and exacerbated many of the committee’s concerns regarding the lack of scientific justification for this pause,” the committee leaders wrote. Breakthrough Institute Report. 

The Department has yet to fully answer the committee’s oversight inquiries and disclose key details underpinning the economic and environmental analysis process that has been undertaken.

“The Department’s continued refusal to provide the requested documents, communication, and scientific evidence has led to this inflection point, and appears to be counter to its own Scientific Integrity policy, which has the stated purpose of being ‘meant to strengthen the actual and perceived credibility of the federal government and all federal government-sponsored research,’” the committee leaders wrote. “As the Breakthrough Institute report stated, the very possibility of Dr. Howarth’s erroneous study influencing the Department’s decisions ‘demonstrates how faulty science in the name of climate can derail important policy debates, and make the global energy transition far harder.’”