A Bruxelles
25 janv.
La lettre de 60 parlementaires de toute l’Europe à Joe Biden
Dear President Biden and Secretary Granholm:
We write to express our support as Members of the European Parliament and of national parliaments for a potential decision by the Biden Administration to pause the approval of new Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) export facilities to fully consider their climate, environmental justice, and economic impacts.
US LNG has played an important role in helping Europe avoid a short-term energy crisis brought on by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. At the same time almost all EU member states reduced and continue reducing their gas demand. We are concerned that a false depiction of European energy needs is now being used as an excuse by the fossil fuel industry and their allies to dramatically expand US LNG exports to the global market.
Europe should not be used as an excuse to expand LNG exports that threaten our shared climate and have dire impacts on US communities. Europe’s current consumption of fossil gas is already being met under current import levels and with existing infrastructure. Even with current demand, the European LNG import infrastructure has been used at only 60% in 2023, suggesting that there is likely no infrastructure bottleneck impeding more U.S. LNG from reaching EU markets, and that an LNG facility build-out in the US would be even less needed. Looking ahead, and enshrined in several EU policies, European fossil gas demand is set to structurally decline as the continent continues to invest in energy efficiency and renewable energy, and to electrify its power, buildings and industrial sectors. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), “Europe’s natural gas demand is forecast to decline by 8% (or over 35 bcm) during 2022-2026 and by 2026 to stand almost 20% (or 110 bcm) below the level reached in 2021.” The IEA also concluded that no new LNG infrastructure is needed to meet existing demand as we deliver on our climate pledges and work towards net-zero emissions by 2050. Combined measures set out in the RePowerEU plan could reach a reduction of -67% of the EU gas demand, compared to 2018 levels by 2030.
This transition away from fossil fuels will only be held back by the construction of new LNG export facilities in the US and import facilities in Europe. The demand for new gas from industry voices in Europe is a false one, designed to lock-in the construction of new, polluting infrastructure that will quickly become stranded assets, the costs of which will be passed onto the public. Contrary to what gas proponents say, the European public's economic, social and environmental interests are best served by policies that accelerate renewable energy and transition away from oil and gas, not by fossil fuel infrastructure build-out that is increasingly out of touch with demand realities.
The construction of new LNG infrastructure would also be in direct contradiction to the commitment made by both the European Union and the United States at COP28 to accelerate action in this critical decade to transition away from fossil fuels. Scientists on both continents have made it clear that no new fossil fuel infrastructure can be constructed if we are to meet the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement. This includes LNG exports, which data suggests might be even more greenhouse gas intensive than coal over their lifecycle. A decision to reassess new LNG export facilities based on their climate impacts would strengthen the agreement made in COP28, setting a powerful precedent for how to implement this shared goal.
We are also deeply concerned about the environmental justice impacts of increased US LNG exports. As our colleagues in the U.S. Congress wrote in a letter inNovember, “LNG exports pollute communities along the whole value chain of LNG production, including those located near fracking wells and pipelines, in the areas where LNG is liquified, and also in the communities overseas where it is imported and combusted. By exacerbating climate change, LNG exports also pose a threat to environmental justice at home and abroad, because the impacts of climate change fall most heavily on indigenous and low-income communities and communities of color.”
For all of these reasons, we urge the Biden Administration to pause the approval of all new LNG export facilities, until it can properly assess the impact of these facilities on the climate, environmental justice, and the public interest. We know that ongoing dependence on fossil gas, no matter where it comes from, is not in the best interest of the European Union and we are confident you will come to the same conclusion in the United States.
Sincerely,
TOUSSAINT Marie, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
EICKHOUT Bas, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
GRUFFAT Claude, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
GALLÉE Malte, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
DALUNDE Jakop, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
HOLMGREN Pär, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
BLOSS Michael, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
KUHNKE Alice, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
LARROUTUROU Pierre, Member of the European Parliament, Socialists and Democrats Group
ANDRESEN Rasmus, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
SATOURI Mounir, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
KOKKALIS Petros, Member of the European Parliament, The Left Group, GUE/NGL
MASSARD Lydie, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
...................................................................
www.marietoussaint.eu
25 janv.
La lettre de 60 parlementaires de toute l’Europe à Joe Biden
Dear President Biden and Secretary Granholm:
We write to express our support as Members of the European Parliament and of national parliaments for a potential decision by the Biden Administration to pause the approval of new Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) export facilities to fully consider their climate, environmental justice, and economic impacts.
US LNG has played an important role in helping Europe avoid a short-term energy crisis brought on by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. At the same time almost all EU member states reduced and continue reducing their gas demand. We are concerned that a false depiction of European energy needs is now being used as an excuse by the fossil fuel industry and their allies to dramatically expand US LNG exports to the global market.
Europe should not be used as an excuse to expand LNG exports that threaten our shared climate and have dire impacts on US communities. Europe’s current consumption of fossil gas is already being met under current import levels and with existing infrastructure. Even with current demand, the European LNG import infrastructure has been used at only 60% in 2023, suggesting that there is likely no infrastructure bottleneck impeding more U.S. LNG from reaching EU markets, and that an LNG facility build-out in the US would be even less needed. Looking ahead, and enshrined in several EU policies, European fossil gas demand is set to structurally decline as the continent continues to invest in energy efficiency and renewable energy, and to electrify its power, buildings and industrial sectors. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), “Europe’s natural gas demand is forecast to decline by 8% (or over 35 bcm) during 2022-2026 and by 2026 to stand almost 20% (or 110 bcm) below the level reached in 2021.” The IEA also concluded that no new LNG infrastructure is needed to meet existing demand as we deliver on our climate pledges and work towards net-zero emissions by 2050. Combined measures set out in the RePowerEU plan could reach a reduction of -67% of the EU gas demand, compared to 2018 levels by 2030.
This transition away from fossil fuels will only be held back by the construction of new LNG export facilities in the US and import facilities in Europe. The demand for new gas from industry voices in Europe is a false one, designed to lock-in the construction of new, polluting infrastructure that will quickly become stranded assets, the costs of which will be passed onto the public. Contrary to what gas proponents say, the European public's economic, social and environmental interests are best served by policies that accelerate renewable energy and transition away from oil and gas, not by fossil fuel infrastructure build-out that is increasingly out of touch with demand realities.
The construction of new LNG infrastructure would also be in direct contradiction to the commitment made by both the European Union and the United States at COP28 to accelerate action in this critical decade to transition away from fossil fuels. Scientists on both continents have made it clear that no new fossil fuel infrastructure can be constructed if we are to meet the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement. This includes LNG exports, which data suggests might be even more greenhouse gas intensive than coal over their lifecycle. A decision to reassess new LNG export facilities based on their climate impacts would strengthen the agreement made in COP28, setting a powerful precedent for how to implement this shared goal.
We are also deeply concerned about the environmental justice impacts of increased US LNG exports. As our colleagues in the U.S. Congress wrote in a letter inNovember, “LNG exports pollute communities along the whole value chain of LNG production, including those located near fracking wells and pipelines, in the areas where LNG is liquified, and also in the communities overseas where it is imported and combusted. By exacerbating climate change, LNG exports also pose a threat to environmental justice at home and abroad, because the impacts of climate change fall most heavily on indigenous and low-income communities and communities of color.”
For all of these reasons, we urge the Biden Administration to pause the approval of all new LNG export facilities, until it can properly assess the impact of these facilities on the climate, environmental justice, and the public interest. We know that ongoing dependence on fossil gas, no matter where it comes from, is not in the best interest of the European Union and we are confident you will come to the same conclusion in the United States.
Sincerely,
TOUSSAINT Marie, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
EICKHOUT Bas, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
GRUFFAT Claude, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
GALLÉE Malte, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
DALUNDE Jakop, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
HOLMGREN Pär, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
BLOSS Michael, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
KUHNKE Alice, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
LARROUTUROU Pierre, Member of the European Parliament, Socialists and Democrats Group
ANDRESEN Rasmus, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
SATOURI Mounir, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
KOKKALIS Petros, Member of the European Parliament, The Left Group, GUE/NGL
MASSARD Lydie, Member of the European Parliament, Greens/EFA Group
...................................................................
La lettre de 60 parlementaires de toute l’Europe à Joe Biden — Justice !
Dear President Biden and Secretary Granholm: We write to express our support as Members of the European Parliament and of national parliaments for a potential decision by the Biden Administration to pause the approval of new Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) export facilities to fully consider
www.marietoussaint.eu
