25
positive, while having only a moderate impact on U.S. natural gas prices.
84
Additionally,
focusing on the benefits of Delfin’s proposed Liquefaction Facility to the State of Louisiana, API
asserts that the ICF State Study found that “by 2035, increased LNG exports could create $16.2
billion in additional state income and create over 74,000 jobs.”
85
In sum, API contends that
approval of Delfin’s Project will help to reduce unemployment and boost state income, which
API asserts will benefit the national economy as a whole.
86
C.
V4EI’s Motion to Intervene and Protest
On May 27, 2014, V4EI filed a motion to intervene and protest. V4EI states that V4EI is
an acronym for Veterans for Energy Independence. V4EI states that it is a limited liability
company with members who are military veterans who have served in United States foreign
conflicts. V4EI states its members have a direct interest in this proceeding for numerous
reasons, including: (i) many of its members are consumers of natural gas who are (or will be)
adversely affected by any increase in the price of natural gas; (ii) many of its members are
consumers of electricity who will be adversely affected if increased demand for LNG exports
results in unprecedented price increases for electricity; (iii) its members are active military
reserve members who may be called into service if the United States fails to consider the foreign
policy consequences and national security implications of the proposed exports; and (iv) the
approval of additional LNG export demands will serve to postpone the displacement of coals
plants with cleaner types of electric generation, thereby prolonging the harmful health impacts to
V4EI members associated with the continued operation of coal-fired plants.
87
84
See id.
85
Id. & n.9.
86
See id. at 6.
87
V4EI Mot. at 2-4.
26
First, V4EI argues that the NGA is a consumer protection statute, and that DOE/FE is
“‘bound under [NGA Section 3] to protect the American consumer’” when determining whether
to issue non-FTA LNG export authorizations.
88
V4EI contends that consistency with the public
interest under the NGA is measured by whether American consumers are getting a fair and
reasonable price for natural gas. V4EI dismisses Delfin’s reliance on DOE/FE’s 2012 LNG
Export Study, stating that the Study fails to serve the purposes of the NGA.
89
V4EI also
criticizes DOE’s application of its 1984 Guidelines. According to V4EI, the 1984 Guidelines
were intended to apply to imports of natural gas, not exports, such that DOE/FE’s analysis on the
basis of those Guidelines is “out of context.”
90
V4EI contends that DOE/FE consequently has
both ignored its obligation to create an adequate record for export applications and failed to
comply with the “core consumer protection mandate” of the NGA.
91
V4EI argues that neither Delfin LNG nor the 2012 LNG Export Study make any effort to
analyze the competitiveness in the international market for natural gas, which V4EI characterizes
as oligopolistic and potentially antagonistic to the interests of the United States. V4EI
emphasizes that a 2013 Institute of Energy Economics study at the University of Cologne found
that the global gas market is “‘regionally interlinked but not perfectly integrated.’”
92
V4EI
acknowledges that U.S. LNG exports may have a “modulating effect” on world prices, but
contends they will not alter the fundamental structure of the international market, are more likely
to raise U.S. natural gas prices, and will expose U.S. consumers to price shocks associated with
the “oligopolistic” international market.
93
88
Id. at 5 (citation omitted).
89
See id. at 6.
90
Id. at 10.
91
Id.
92
Id. at 12 (citation omitted).
93
V4EI Mot. at 12-13.
27
V4EI further asserts that the 2012 LNG Export Study demonstrates that exports will raise
the price of natural gas, which V4EI contends will harm American consumers of natural gas.
According to V4EI, any increases in U.S. GDP would benefit only private natural gas companies
and their investors, “turn[ing] the NGA on its head.”
94
V4EI further argues that neither Delfin’s
Application nor the 2012 LNG Export Study addresses the “regional and seasonal implications
of export policies,” which it deems “critical” to consider.
95
V4EI argues that the 2012 LNG
Export Study ignores economic research demonstrating that exporting U.S. LNG may jeopardize
America’s manufacturing renaissance through increased natural gas and electricity prices (among
other reasons) and through the so-called “resource curse.”
96
Additionally, V4EI contends that
the 2012 LNG Export Study generally discounts price volatility, despite evidence of substantial
volatility in U.S. prices at the regional, national, and international levels.
97
Next, VEI4 asserts that DOE/FE has failed to consider the overall effect of all LNG
export applications approved or pending before DOE/FE. Consequently, according to V4EI,
DOE/FE has not developed an adequate record to support the conclusion that these export
applications “in the aggregate” are consistent with the public interest.
98
V4EI acknowledges that
“expectations for natural gas resources are substantially in excess of the current proven
reserves,” but claims that “those expectations have yet to reach the level of certainty to qualify as
proven by the EIA.”
99
According to V4DI, Delfin and DOE/FE have both failed to consider national energy
requirements adequately. Specifically, V4EI contends the 2012 LNG Export Study does not
94
Id. at 14.
95
Id. at 15.
96
Id.
97
See id. at 17.
98
Id. at 23.
99
V4EI Mot. at 23-24.
Dostları ilə paylaş: |