Brussels – As European leaders and companies are pushing for increased imports of US liquefied gas (LNG), a new report by Greenpeace USA, Earthworks, and Oil Change International highlights the climate threats and financial risks posed by five major new liquefied gas export projects proposed for the US Gulf Coast, most of them still awaiting a final investment decision.[1]
“What we found was crystal clear – any further investment in LNG is not compatible with a livable climate,” said Andres Chang, Senior Research Specialist at Greenpeace USA and lead author of the report. “The massive growth in infrastructure along the Texas and Louisiana Gulf Coast has already created significant public health and ecosystem impacts, threatening entire coastal communities. But it doesn’t stop there. We believe this report shows that, if built, these projects would put global climate goals even further out of reach.”
The report analyses five major US LNG projects – Venture Global CP2, Cameron LNG Phase II, Sabine Pass Stage V, Cheniere Corpus Christi LNG Midscale 8-9, and Freeport LNG Expansion – and finds that each would fail the climate test derived from models in the US Department of Energy’s 2024 LNG Export public interest studies.[2] Each would increase greenhouse gas emissions by edging out renewable energy and driving up global fossil fuel use, undermining the world’s ability to meet the Paris Agreement targets and driving more frequent and intense extreme weather events. The report suggests that future US administrations could therefore revoke export authorisations issued under current US President Trump.
Pressured by Trump and facing the threat of sweeping tariffs, the EU Commission is proposing increased LNG imports.[3] It has also agreed to look into direct public investments by the EU and its member states in gas export facilities outside the EU – including potentially the five US LNG projects analysed in this report – in its Affordable Energy Action Plan released in February 2025.[4]
“Increasing US gas imports will deepen Europe’s dependence on the US, making the EU and national governments even more vulnerable to Trump’s political extortion. EU leaders must break free from fossil fuel dependency and take control of Europe’s future by investing in a renewable, secure and peaceful energy system. A ban on all new fossil fuel projects in the EU would be the right first step, certainly not funding projects abroad,” said Thomas Gelin, Greenpeace EU climate and energy campaigner.
Another result of Trump’s pressure is the calls by some Member States and other EU policymakers to weaken the EU methane regulation, which was adopted just last year, in order to continue importing US liquefied gas despite the fact that its production – mostly coming from fracking – is associated with particularly high methane emissions.[5][6]
“This report adds to a rapidly growing body of evidence that financing U.S. LNG is not a sound decision for insurers, investors, or purchasers – something the EU and America’s Asian allies must keep in mind as President Trump pressures them to increase their imports of U.S. LNG under threat of sweeping tariffs. Countries with climate commitments, such as those in the EU, should be very wary of the climate cost of importing US LNG,” said Dr Dakota Raynes, Senior Manager of Research, Policy, and Data at Earthworks.
European energy companies have already signed long-term purchase agreements for four of the projects analysed in the report. These contracts extend well beyond 2035, the year by which Europe must phase-out fossil gas if it is serious about meeting its international climate commitments. These companies include SEFE (Germany), BASF (Germany), GASTRADE S.A. (Greece), DTEK (Ukraine), TotalEnergies (France), PKN Orlen (Poland), Gap (Portugal) and Equinor (Norway) – several of which are fully or partially state-owned.[7]
“Fossil fuel dependency has long externalized its true costs, forcing communities to bear the burden of pollution, sickness, and economic instability,” says James Hiatt, founder and director of For a Better Bayou. “For decades the oil and gas industry has known about the devastating health and climate impacts of its operations, yet it continues to expand, backed by billions in private and public financing. These harms are not isolated – they’re systemic, and they threaten all of us. This report is a call to conscience. It’s time we stop propping up deadly false solutions and start investing in a transition to energy systems that sustain life, not sacrifice it.”
Greenpeace calls on EU leaders to stop new long-term purchase agreements for liquefied gas and drop the proposal for direct financial investments in gas export facilities. Instead, the EU should impose a ban on all new fossil fuel projects, including new liquefied gas import terminals, stop all public investments in fossil fuel infrastructure and agree to end fossil gas by 2035 at the latest.
ENDS
Notes:
Read the full report: Failing the climate test: LNG projects awaiting final investment decision do not stand up to US Government analysis
Read the European media briefing
Watch the press conference recording
[1] At the time of drafting of the report, all five were awaiting a final investment decision. On June 24, 2025, Cheniere Corpus Christi LNG announced a positive final investment decision.
[2] December 2024 | ENERGY, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF US LNG EXPORTS
[3] Trump says EU must buy $350B of US energy to get tariff relief – POLITICO
[4] Action Plan for Affordable Energy
[5] The Member States are: Bulgaria, Czechia, Greece, Hungaria, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia.
[6] Liquefied natural gas carbon footprint is worse than coal | Cornell Chronicle
[7] Source: Sierra Club US LNG Export Tracker, date as of 4 June 2025
Contacts:
Katie Nelson, Senior Communications Specialist, Greenpeace USA, +1 (678) 644-1681, (GMT -8), [email protected]
Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), [email protected]
