Anti-fossil fuel groups intend to stop LNG exports, starting with Freeport LNG in Texas

The humanitarian aspect of LNG exports to European countries needing a substitute for Russia natural gas means nothing to these radical groups.

LNG tanker inbound to the Freeport LNG terminal southwest of Houston, Texas

Anti-fossil fuel groups’ latest targets are LNG export terminals, starting with the Freeport LNG terminal in Freeport, Texas. Some 140 groups wrote letters to insurance groups the week of June 5, 2023, demanding they stop providing insurance for LNG export terminals, including the terminal 70 miles southwest of Houston on Quintana Island, Freeport, Texas, which is near the massive Dow Chemical complex.

Earlier this week, a coalition led by Public Citizen and Rainforest Action Network launched a campaign to get insurers to stop covering liquefied natural gas terminals along the Gulf Coast. The group of organizations wrote to insurance agencies demanding they stop underwriting LNG export terminals, especially the Freeport LNG terminal and the nearly two dozen other facilities that have been proposed along the Gulf Coast of Texas and Louisiana.

Their letter said in part:

This is a call for insurers to stop providing coverage to explosive methane gas export terminals. We urge insurers to meet with communities impacted by the liquefied natural gas industry as soon as possible... If there is no response, we will move forward with a public campaign. We will address these concerns with the international media, the supporters of nonprofits, and policymakers, and we will organize protests at your offices.

The group had obtained the insurance certificate showing that some of the largest insurers in the world had already issued insurance policies to Freeport LNG, so they targeted those insurance companies with their threatening letters.

What is their justification for pressuring the insurance companies to stop facilitating LNG exports? Climate change, of course:

Insurers aren’t going to make changes to how they cover fossil fuels, and especially LNG, on their own,” said Kerrina Williams, an organizer with Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group. “Pressuring the industry to make the changes is vital to slowing climate change.

The current list of applications for new or expanded US LNG export facilities is long. Many new LNG export facilities were already being proposed before President Biden pledged to come to the aid of European countries that were dependent on Russian natural gas before Russia invaded Ukraine and the North Stream pipelines were mysteriously blown up. Biden’s promises were thought to be overly optimistic, but the US natural gas industry was able to blow past his promises. By mid-year 2022, the US expanded its title as the largest natural gas producer in the world to be the world’s largest exporter of LNG.

These anti-fossil fuel NGOs could care less about the humanitarian aspects of exporting LNG to countries that have few or no alternative fuel sources to get through upcoming winters without Russian natural gas. These well-funded NGOs want to make it prohibitively expensive for LNG exporters to get insurance for their facilities. They want insurance companies to stop underwriting new plants and the expansion of existing ones.

Who are these anti-fossil fuels/anti-LNG groups? The lead organizations are Public Citizen and Rainforest Action Network. GuideStar provides this information:

Public Citizen: “Covers a wide variety of projects under the direction of Public Citizen’s president, Robert Weissman. Public Citizen is a national, nonprofit consumer advocacy organization founded in 1971 to represent consumer interests in Congress, the executive branch, and the courts. We fight for openness and democratic accountability in government, for the right of consumers to seek redress in the courts; for clean, safe, and sustainable energy sources; for social and economic justice in trade policies. Their annual gross receipts as $9 million, with assets of $4.3 million. They are part of Public Citizen Public Foundation, Inc., whose gross receipts are $24.6 million and assets are $35 million.

Rainforest Action Network “preserves forests, protects the climate, and upholds human rights by challenging corporate power and systemic injustice through frontline partnerships and strategic campaigns.” Their annual gross receipts are $11.7 million, and their assets are $14 million.

This is a developing story, and I will be digging into more details in the coming days. Thanks to my Substack colleague Ken Mull (mulling.substack.com) for his help on this story.